Bug#747121: gnutls28: Please take over libgnutls-dev package from gnutls26 and enforce strict GPLv2+ compliance of produced binary packages

[Dimitri John Ledkov]

Yeap noted. I did reply to that email from you. Not sure if that was
via debian-devel or else how.

Indeed then my patch is not needed then. Just a one liner adding "breaks".

Regards,

Dimitri.

On 6 May 2014 18:46, Andreas Metzler <ametzler at bebt.de> wrote:
> On 2014-05-05 Dimitri John Ledkov <xnox at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> Source: gnutls28
>> Severity: normal
>> Tags: patch
>
>> Dear Maintainer,
>
>> Following recent gnutls28 transition thread on debian-devel, here is a
>> patch to implement transition from gnutls26 to gnutls28 source and
>> binary packages, whilst at the same time enforcing strict GPLv2+
>> compatibility of the resultant binary packages.
>
>> Please consider applying below patch or tweaking it, as you see more
>> appropriate.
> [...]
>
> Hello,
>
> As debian-devel seems to swallow my mail let me publish my
> thoughts/progress report here:
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Andreas Metzler <ametzler at bebt.de> -----
> Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 17:53:19 -0000
> From: Andreas Metzler <ametzler at bebt.de>
> Subject: Re: gnutls28 transition
> Message-ID: <bpvk3b-ep1.ln1 at argenau.downhill.at.eu.org>
>
> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud <odyx at debian.org> wrote:
>> Le dimanche, 4 mai 2014, 02.14:17 peter green a écrit :
>>> Personally I'd add a (build-)depends on the relicensed gmp in the next
>>> gnutls28 upload. That way packages can (build-)depend on the new
>>> gnutls and be assured of getting a GPLv2 compatible version.
>
> Hello,
>
> Afaiui it would be perfectly fine to /build/ GPLv2 code against older
> GMP as long as we distribute the resulting binary only together with
> the newer GMP binary. (The binary will often be identical, no matter
> whether it is built against gmp 5.3 or 6).
>
> Also I am reluctant with manually overriding gmp shlibs. How about
> simply adding
> Breaks: libgmp10 (<< 2:6)
> to the libgnutls28 binary package?
> [...]
>
>> Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
>>> Should we start transition to gnutls28 by default, for all packages
>>> that are compatible?
>
> Due to size of the transition it is a little bit difficult, see
> <http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.release/73990>
> (Please keep this thread on d-d, -release is not a discussion list.)
>
> I have done some test-builds and reported most of the issues I
> found[1]. Some important library packages have already switched (cups,
> curl), I guess the next one would be neon or gnome-vfs.
>
> cu Andreas
>
> [1]
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=gnutls3;users=ametzler@debian.org



-- 
Regards,

Dimitri.