Bug#535240: renders existing projects inaccessible

[Neil Williams]

On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 16:43:42 +0100
Neil Williams <codehelp at debian.org> wrote:

> > I've just finished the work and requested sponsorship in the team. 

There are a few more issues to resolve, AFAICT:

Now running lintian...
W: libgda4-doc: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file
W: libgda4-common: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file
W: libgda4-4: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file
W: libgda4-4: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libgda-4.0-4 libgda-report-4.0-4 libgda-xslt-4.0-4
W: libgda4-bin: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/gda-sql-4.0.1.gz 39: warning: `l' not defined
W: libgda4-bin: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/gda-list-config
W: libgda4-bin: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/gda-list-config-4.0
W: libgda4-bin: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/gda-list-server-op
W: libgda4-bin: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/gda-list-server-op-4.0
W: libgda4-bin: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/gda-test-connection-4.0
Finished running lintian.

The package could also do with symbols files. (lintian -iI)

The SONAME handling upstream is correct and the lintian warning is
correct - 

libgda4-4.0.2$ objdump -p libgda/.libs/libgda-4.0.so.4.0.0 | sed -n -e's/^[[:space:]]*SONAME[[:space:]]*//p' | sed -e's/\([0-9]\)\.so\./\1-/; s/\.so\.//'
libgda-4.0-4

So the package name should be libgda-4.0-4 not libgda-4-4 IMHO.

This problem existed in libgda3-3 (along with quite a few others):

W: libgda3-3: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libgda-3.0-3 libgda-report-3.0-3 libgdasql-3.0-3

However, I don't see that following libgda3 is sufficient reason to
persist with the wrong SONAME in libgda4.

If you cannot find sponsors in the team, you should approach
mentors.debian.net where other sponsors will consider the package -
once the above lintian warnings are *all* fixed. Ensure that you upload
a built package to mentors.debian.net for review, do not just post the
svn.debian.org URL.

> Josselin wrote:
> > 
> > You’re welcome to help packaging it if you feel things are not going
> > fast enough for you.
> 
> Josselin - is this a sponsoring exercise or are you thinking that I'd
> be listed in Uploaders? Not sure if I have time for that but I do have
> reverse dependencies that need to migrate to libgda4.

Actually, my reverse dependencies that use libgda3-3 are easier to
manage without migrating to libgda4, so I'm losing interest in this
package. I have my own bugs to fix, the package is not ready for
sponsoring (at least not by me) and I don't have time to do the
packaging of libgda4 myself. I'll be dropping all libgda support from
my own code in the relevant next upstream release, just to save having
to do it once libgda3 disappears.

I've downgraded anjuta to testing for now which at least allows me to
continue fixing my own code in anjuta.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-gnome-maintainers/attachments/20090705/be8a2265/attachment-0001.pgp>