The whole point of this transition is that the rebuilt library is not
compatible. So it can't provide the old name and there can't be a transitional
package.
Cheers
Julien
On August 9, 2015 8:25:46 AM CEST, Eriberto Mota eribe...@debian.org wrote:
Hi Julien,
I applied your patch and I updated
Hi Julien,
Ok. I will do it:
1. Upload to experimental, without close the bug.
2. Notify all maintainers of dependent packages, allowing changes up
to next Saturday.
3. In next Saturday, upload to unstable, closing the bug.
4. Notify all maintainers that uploaded their packages to
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 10:42:29 -0300, Eriberto wrote:
Hi Julien,
Ok. I will do it:
1. Upload to experimental, without close the bug.
2. Notify all maintainers of dependent packages, allowing changes up
to next Saturday.
3. In next Saturday, upload to unstable, closing the bug.
Processing control commands:
reopen -1
Bug #790975 {Done: Joao Eriberto Mota Filho eribe...@debian.org} [src:afflib]
afflib: library transition may be needed when GCC 5 is the default
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
all fixed versions will be cleared,
Control: reopen -1
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 19:33:49 +, Joao Eriberto Mota Filho wrote:
afflib (3.7.6-4) unstable; urgency=medium
.
* Upload to unstable.
* Updated all symbols. (Closes: #790975)
No, that's not how it works. You need to rename the binary package.
Cheers,
Julien
Hum... Sorry, can you detail for me how to proceed? Need I use v5?
Thanks!
Eriberto
2015-08-06 17:18 GMT-03:00 Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org:
Control: reopen -1
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 19:33:49 +, Joao Eriberto Mota Filho wrote:
afflib (3.7.6-4) unstable; urgency=medium
.
Hi Julien,
Thanks a lot for your quick reply. I will wait 2 days to fix some
symbols for ports.
Regards,
Eriberto
2015-08-06 18:08 GMT-03:00 Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 22:55:32 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 17:44:32 -0300, Eriberto