jack Debian packaging?

Felipe Sateler fsateler at gmail.com
Tue Mar 17 04:29:15 UTC 2009


On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 11:55, Reinhard Tartler <siretart at tauware.de> wrote:
> Felipe Sateler <fsateler at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> This part is only interesting for pkg-multimedia, so I dropped upstream from
>> the loop.
>>
>> Here is what I think we should do. Warn maintainers via debian-devel about the
>> change, and then mass-bug/nmu the ones that are not yet fixed after a while.
>> After that, upload a new version without the transitional packages. For
>> reference, here is the dd-list of the affected packages:
>
> dropping the transitional package seem correct to me. but the list of
> the affected packages should only be the packages that actually
> reference libjack0.100.0-0, which is the following list to my counting:
>

<snip list>
>
> and most of them (if not all) should be fixable by binNMU'ing them,
> which would mean the release team could handle then.

My list was made by searching for packages that build-depend on
libjack0.100.0-dev without an alternate dependency on libjack-dev. It
was done this way:

grep-dctrl -FBuild-Depends -sPackage,Build-Depends
'libjack0.100.0-dev'
/var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.au.debian.org_debian_dists_sid_main_source_Sources
| grep-dctrl -v -FBuild-depends libjack-dev -sPackage | sed -e
's/Package: //' | dd-list --stdin

Which makes all of the packages in my list not binNMUable.

Because the actual package name transition has been made, most binary
packages will continue to be installable (for example csound, which I
maintain, does not build-depend on libjack-dev but still depends on
libjack0), but they will FTBFS anyway.

Saludos,
Felipe Sateler



More information about the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list