On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 12:41:19AM +0100, Dominik George wrote: > I propose that you, Helmut, try to test whether this fixes the problem and > report back if it does.
Thanks for your work on this issue. Introducing a new binary package is a quite big change. Please contact the release team on whether such a change is acceptable at this point of the freeze. Note that simply removing M-A:same is also way to solve this issue and that libphone-utils0 has very few reverse dependencies. This is not to say that the general approach of splitting the package would be flawed. To the contrary. So I encourage you to target experimental or even unstable with such a fix independently. The new package you are introducing is named libphone-utils0-common. So when there is a soname bump, there will be a libphone-utils1-common package. Those packages then share a configuration file. Transferring that configuration file across packages seems difficult at best. It might be better to drop the soname from the common package. This is not without problems though. I suggest to wait for a maintainer response on this issue. Unrelated to the reported issue, the code updating the configuration file could to better at leaving backup files in case something goes wrong. Helmut -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
