FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Masters Of The Universe

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-16-2009, 11:31 AM
James Westby
 
Default libc-client2007 transition

Hi all,

I'd like confirmation that my plan for this situation makes sense.

At the end of last year there was a small transition done to move
from libc-client2007b to libc-client2007d.

However, Debian then reverted this change (with an epoch), as they
didn't want the SONAME bump in lenny.

That package was synced, so we now have the reverse transition ready
to move, with libc-client2007d on the NBS list.

However, as we don't have the same SONAME concerns at this point, I'm
not sure whether we should do this reverse transition.

My proposal then is to prepare an upload of uw-imap, that has a
"really" version number, to get back the libc-client2007d packages.

We can then complete the transition with uploads to the half-dozen
packages depending on the old SONAME. Once Debian has started the
transition again we can sync once more.

Does that make sense?

Thanks,

James


--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-17-2009, 08:02 AM
Luca Falavigna
 
Default libc-client2007 transition

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

James Westby ha scritto:
> At the end of last year there was a small transition done to move
> from libc-client2007b to libc-client2007d.
>
> However, Debian then reverted this change (with an epoch), as they
> didn't want the SONAME bump in lenny.

I'm not sure Debian reverted the upload only to avoid SONAME bump, there
was probably a problem in the upstream code itself, but I'm not sure
about this. Maybe Jonas could shed some light.

> My proposal then is to prepare an upload of uw-imap, that has a
> "really" version number, to get back the libc-client2007d packages.
>
> We can then complete the transition with uploads to the half-dozen
> packages depending on the old SONAME. Once Debian has started the
> transition again we can sync once more.

According to NBS page, we only have to rebuild three packages, so I'd
manage them and leave uw-imap as is, unless there is a strong rationale
behind this. The only action I'd take is syncing 8:2007b~dfsg-1.1 from
unstable (fix for #510918).

Regards,

- --
. '`. Luca Falavigna
: :' : Ubuntu MOTU Developer
`. `'` Debian Maintainer
`- GPG Key: 0x86BC2A50
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAklxnp4ACgkQnXjXEYa8KlCRgQCeJ2dXJafaXI rW6bJey/Ysp7t6
qkgAn353wTNq9M+iLq6UOAcLJ0K6ua2x
=mFVc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-17-2009, 02:40 PM
Jonas Smedegaard
 
Default libc-client2007 transition

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 10:02:27AM +0100, Luca Falavigna wrote:
>James Westby ha scritto:
>> At the end of last year there was a small transition done to move
>> from libc-client2007b to libc-client2007d.
>>
>> However, Debian then reverted this change (with an epoch), as they
>> didn't want the SONAME bump in lenny.
>
>I'm not sure Debian reverted the upload only to avoid SONAME bump,
>there was probably a problem in the upstream code itself, but I'm not
>sure about this. Maybe Jonas could shed some light.

There was no problems with upstream code, it was only to avoid SONAME
bump.

Upstream has no shared library, that is a Debian hack. But historically
upstream license required (by my interpretation at least) the upstream
version to be clearly visible in derived code, which lead me to the
current unusual packaging routine of bumping SONAME with each new
upstream release.

In other words: There is no technical reason for SONAME to be changed so
frequently. It was wrong of me to bump the SONAME of a library in deep
freeze, but when the "cat was out of the bag" it was suggested to change
epoch as a simplest workaround.


Kind regards,

- Jonas

- --
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAklx/AYACgkQn7DbMsAkQLhkZwCffGo+CT4rAD+bLQ4Yis82QWNN
uGsAn0JjR0w/JnTH2L5FIzhMa7HBQM9a
=Ls5C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-17-2009, 11:08 PM
James Westby
 
Default libc-client2007 transition

On Sat, 2009-01-17 at 16:40 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 10:02:27AM +0100, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> >James Westby ha scritto:
> >> At the end of last year there was a small transition done to move
> >> from libc-client2007b to libc-client2007d.
> >>
> >> However, Debian then reverted this change (with an epoch), as they
> >> didn't want the SONAME bump in lenny.
> >
> >I'm not sure Debian reverted the upload only to avoid SONAME bump,
> >there was probably a problem in the upstream code itself, but I'm not
> >sure about this. Maybe Jonas could shed some light.
>
> There was no problems with upstream code, it was only to avoid SONAME
> bump.
>
> Upstream has no shared library, that is a Debian hack. But historically
> upstream license required (by my interpretation at least) the upstream
> version to be clearly visible in derived code, which lead me to the
> current unusual packaging routine of bumping SONAME with each new
> upstream release.
>
> In other words: There is no technical reason for SONAME to be changed so
> frequently. It was wrong of me to bump the SONAME of a library in deep
> freeze, but when the "cat was out of the bag" it was suggested to change
> epoch as a simplest workaround.

Hi Jonas,

Thanks for the information.

Do you think that Luca's suggestion to follow you in Debian and pull
your revert of the SONAME, and then "un-transition" the packages that
we had rebuilt for the new SONAME is a good one?

Once lenny is released then we can perform the transition at the same
time as you.

Thanks,

James


--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-18-2009, 06:28 PM
Jonas Smedegaard
 
Default libc-client2007 transition

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 12:08:14AM +0000, James Westby wrote:

>Do you think that Luca's suggestion to follow you in Debian and pull
>your revert of the SONAME, and then "un-transition" the packages that
>we had rebuilt for the new SONAME is a good one?

I generally believe that it is best for derivatives to keep as close as
possible to their upstream as possible - from a technical point of view,
disregarding other opinions about the Ubuntu "fork" specifically.

In this case I see no "collateral damage" with this approach. But really
I am not following Ubuntu closely so cannot reliably judge the
implications (as example, when I a few years ago helped repackage the
MoinMoin wiki engine for Ubuntu I was caught by your choice of switching
to a newer default Python version).

Good luck with this!


- Jonas

- --
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAklzgvUACgkQn7DbMsAkQLj5ZwCgpVE9R49L9I 3jSYAWB99TY13/
kMoAn3NvMzkpfe6ErxGDcSqCyyZheRXB
=ja5T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:10 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org