On Sat, Aug 08, 2015 at 07:25:14PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Source: gettext > Version: 0.19.5.1-1 > Severity: grave > Justification: renders package unusable > > I just noticed we already have libasprintf0v5 in Debian/m68k unstable. > This cannot be, because we haven’t started the GCC 5 transition yet (I > know because src:gcc-defaults is currently building on one of my boxen > and src:gcc-5 has just finished building). > > Evidently, src:gettext was uploaded, with the new binary package name, > without adding a versioned B-D on gcc (>= 4:5). > > This means that src:gettext must re-do the transition after adding the > versioned B-D, changing soname and binary package name yet again.
I waited for gcc 5 to be the default as announced by Matthias on -devel-announce. While I agree that a B-D would have been nice for you and the m68k arch, renaming the packages again is not reasonable for two reasons: * m68k is not a released architecture. * There is absolutely no debian package depending on either the old or the new library. So, instead of doing extra work for nothing, can you tell me what kind of problem will the m68k architecture have if you just trigger an m68k-binary-only NMU of gettext once you have gcc 5 in unstable? Also, while we are at it: Considering that there has not been an emphasis on B-D in the various announcement I've seen about this, is it really a good idea to have the override file for m68k to be the same as the one for the released architectures? (Being it different, you would have detected this problem before the package arrived at unstable). [ Cc:ing Matthias ] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
