[Debian-med-packaging] libbpp-seq_2.2.0-1~bpo8+1_amd64.changes REJECTED

[Gianfranco Costamagna]

Rename was because of gcc-5 transition, that didn't happen in jessie.

So the rename has to be reverted for backports, otherwise the library will conflict with
the one in jessie, making half of the archive removed if you want to have it installed

look e.g. my mistake in llvm-toolchain-3.5 backport, where I didn't rename it
https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/2016/01/msg00113.html

(sorry for bothering, I'm not 100% sure about this particular case, I just want to point
to a mistake I did in the past, I'm for sure not authoritative at all on the matter, so
please don't trust my opinion :) )

Gianfranco



Il Martedì 17 Maggio 2016 15:42, Alexander Wirt <formorer at formorer.de> ha scritto:
On Tue, 17 May 2016, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Bad dak is bad
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=libbpp-seq&suite=unstable
> libbpp-seq9 | 2.0.3-1       | oldstable       | amd64, armel, armhf, i386, ia64, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, s390x, sparc
> libbpp-seq9 | 2.1.0-1       | stable          | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x
> libbpp-seq9 | 2.1.0-1       | stable-kfreebsd | kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386
> libbpp-seq9 | 2.1.0-1       | unstable        | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, hurd-i386, i386, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, mips, mips64el, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x
> 
> 
> 
> dak ls libbpp-seq9v5 
> libbpp-seq9v5 | 2.2.0-1       | testing    | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x
> libbpp-seq9v5 | 2.2.0-1       | unstable   | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, hurd-i386, i386, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, mips, mips64el, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x
> 
> 
> I guess Andreas is fully correct, the rename is not necessary for backports, right?
I would expect it to follow unstable. I guess the rename had a reason.


Alex