[Filesystems-devel] Bug#904286: f2fs-tools: Please package f2fs-tools v1.11.0

Vincent Cheng vcheng at debian.org
Tue Aug 21 21:01:10 BST 2018

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso at mit.edu> wrote:
> OK, I've created a new project in Salsa for f2fs-tools:
>         https://salsa.debian.org/debian/f2fs-tools
> and I've uploaded git repo with a work-in-progress for a f2fs-tools
> v1.11.0 packaging.
> A couple of things which I've noted:
> 1)  The maintainers is listed as:
>         filesystems-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
> I wonder if it's worth it to migrate the mailing list over to
> lists.debian.org, and leave a forwarding pointer behind at the
> lists.alioth.debian.org address?  It will take a while to update all
> of the various file system utility packages to use a non-Alioth
> address, but I wonder if we should get started.  Not high priority, so
> we don't have to do this on this particular upload.

I can't find a reference right now, but I seem to recall that one of
the Alioth admins pointed out that mailing lists specifically for
package/bug tracking purposes (i.e. not used for discussion) shouldn't
be migrated to lists.d.o. I don't know what other alternatives there
are, however. I haven't really kept up with the Alioth
migration/deprecation as you can probably tell. :)

> 2)  In f2fs-tools 1.10.0-1, there is the shared libary package
> libf2fs0, which contains the shared libaries:
>         libf2fs.so.4.0.0
>         libf2fs_format.so.3.0.0
> In f2fs-tools 1.11.0 upstream, these have been bumped to:
>         libf2fs.so.5.0.0
>         libf2fs_format.so.4.0.0
> I very much doubt any other packages are actually depending on
> libf2fs0, but it seems wrong that we're using libf2fs0, as opposed to
> say, libf2fs4 and now libf2fs5.
> Was this intentional, or just one of those things that had never been
> noticed/fixed earlier?

Well, the shared library being split into a separate package was
intentional (#793863), but having never updated the package name is
not (I must have overlooked this somehow...). I wonder how I never got
any bug reports about this, because in theory that should mean that
android-libf2fs-utils (src:android-platform-system-extras) is flat out
broken (I never initiated any transitions or binNMU requests for
android-platform-system-extras after f2fs-tools updates).


More information about the Filesystems-devel mailing list