Re: transition: liblo

Jaromír Mikeš mira.mikes at
Fri Nov 6 01:48:55 UTC 2009

> Od: Felipe Sateler <fsateler at>

 FS > Package:
 FS > Severity: normal
 FS > User: at
 FS > Usertags: transition
 FS > New upstream liblo bumps SONAME, so we need to transition. Also, we take
 FS > this opportunity to change the -dev package name to unversion it.
 FS > liblo-dev now provides liblo0-dev to avoid breaking too many packages.
 FS > However, rosegarden and sineshaper have versioned build-dependencies on
 FS > liblo0-dev. They both require versions already in oldstable, so a simple
 FS > NMU dropping the versioning is enough for them. All other packages
 FS > should require binNMUs, and the new version is supposed to be
 FS > API-compatible with the old one.
JM > Hi Felipe,
JM > sorry for newbie like question I don't understand how this process should be
JM > done.
JM > Can I help with it somehow?
JM > btw lv2fil and zynjacku package I would like get uploaded will take advantage
JM > from new liblo version.
FE> Basically, we are waiting for the release team's approval to upload the
FE> new version to unstable. Because there cannot be any packages that are
FE> not built by any source, the new liblo (package name liblo7) cannot
FE> migrate into testing until all the applications that use liblo
FE> (depending on package liblo0ldbl) are ready to migrate too, so that the
FE> old liblo package can be removed at the same time. This process gets
FE> complicated if several libraries are transitioning, since they may get
FE> entangled.

This mean change build dependency in control file from "liblo0-dev"  to "liblo0-dev (>= 0.26)" and re-upload all packages just after new liblo will move to sid?



More information about the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list