[Android-tools-devel] RFS: android-platform-external-libselinux_6.0.0+r26-1

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

Oops, yes I did, I just pushed them.

About uploading them to experimental first, does that impact your workflow?
Unless its really slowing down your work on other packages, I'd like to play
it safe here and upload the 6.0.0 stuff to experimental first.  Once we have
the full 6.0.0 suite of packages in experimental, I'll upload them all to
unstable.

.hc

殷啟聰:
> Hi Hans,
> 
> Did you forget to push your changes after you upload libselinux and
> libunwind to experimental? I'm preparing a 6.0.0+r26-2 and I don't want to
> commit a manual merge only because of d/changelog.
> 
> I want to add back the version info to the libraries because dh_shlibdeps
> will produce warnings about "can't extract name and version from library
> name 'libselinux.so'". Seems like removing the versions doesn't fit
> Debian's policy well.
> 
> I also think that perhaps we can upload them to unstable now because I have
> been working on updating the others to android-6.0.0_r26. Since the only
> problem blocking us is f2fs-tools's patch <bugs.debian.org/793863>, why
> don't we walk forward faster? :)
> 
> Regards,
> Kai-Chung Yan
> 
> Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at> 於 2015年11月13日週五 18:41 寫道：
> 
>>
>>
>> 殷啟聰:
>>> Hi Hans,
>>>
>>> Actually not any packages that depend on libunwind and libselinux are
>>> uploaded so far, so I don't think it is necessary to upload to
>> experimental.
>>
>> The point is that _all_ of the SDK packages in Debian need to be at the
>> same
>> version.  So we shouldn't put 6.0.0 packages into unstable until we know
>> we'll
>> shortly be uploading 6.0.0 versions of all the Android SDK packages. Since
>> we
>> have a lot of 5.1.1 packages that very close to ready, I think we should
>> get
>> those 5.1.1 packages all uploaded and working before including any newer
>> packages.  That then means we'll have some larger chunk of the Android SDK
>> working in Debian.  Plus some of those 5.1.1 packages have to go through
>> the
>> NEW queue.
>>
>>> About the removal of version info, well actually we don't know it. We
>> don't
>>> know whether we should put API Level 23 or Android version 6 or others as
>>> the version in SONAME, so it'd better not to maintain it.
>>
>> If you want to actively remove that stuff, its ok by me.  But as long as
>> the
>> SONAME version is very low, e.g (1.0.0) then its very unlikely that
>> upstream
>> will use a lower version, so functionally, keeping that 1.0.0 version is
>> the
>> same as having no SONAME.  Therefore its very low risk to keep it in place.
>> And it'll be no maintenance work unless we change it.
>>
>> .hc
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Kai-Chung Yan
>>>
>>> Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at> 於 2015年11月13日週五 03:51 寫道：
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the update!  The changes look good.  I'm worried that we
>> don't
>>>> have
>>>> all of 5.1.1 uploaded yet, and all the SDK packages need to have synced
>>>> versions.  I'll upload the 6.0.0 packages to experimental for now, then
>>>> once
>>>> we have all of 6.0 updated, we can push them to unstable.
>>>>
>>>> About removing the lib SONAME version, its hard to say if that's the
>> right
>>>> way.  It is definitely the right way if we are not going to maintain
>> that
>>>> version. But I don't think having it is doing any harm, so I think its
>> low
>>>> priority work.  Getting all the build-tools and platform-tools for
>> 5.1.1 is
>>>> more important so we can have a complete set in Debian, IMHO.
>>>>
>>>> .hc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 殷啟聰:
>>>>> Hi Android Tools Team,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've updated SELinux for Android to android-6.0.0_r26. This is a rather
>>>>> simple package so it will be easy to review.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that in this version I removed the version info, here are the
>>>> changes:
>>>>>
>>>>>   * android-libselinux only installs libselinux.so without version
>>>> postfix
>>>>>   * android-libselinux-dev won't install symlinks to libselinux.so
>>>>>   * The SONAME in libselinux.so is "libselinux.so" withoud version
>>>> postfix
>>>>>
>>>>> I am thinking of making such changes to other AOSP packages since AOSP
>>>> does
>>>>> not maintain the version info.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Kai-Chung Yan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Android-tools-devel mailing list
>>>>> Android-tools-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/android-tools-devel
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Android-tools-devel mailing list
>>>> Android-tools-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
>>>>
>> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/android-tools-devel
>>>
>>