On 09/09/15, 07:30am, Simon McVittie wrote: > On 09/09/15 07:00, Jose-Luis Rivas wrote: > > On 08/09/15, 10:24pm, Jose-Luis Rivas wrote: > >> Just to be clear, if I rebuild this with the source packages from > >> unstable with a new upstream version the rename is not necessary? > > > > Nevermind, upstream bumped soname anyway. > > A new upstream SONAME makes the v5 transition rename unnecessary; but if > upstream have bumped SONAME, then they've broken API/ABI (or are doing > it wrong), which increases the risk that reverse-dependencies of > libtorrent will fail to compile or fail to work. > > A new upstream release that does not bump the SONAME does not have any > effect on the need for a transition/rename. > > I suspect that the lowest-risk approach to getting this transition > finished in a finite time is to do the v5 rename, then ask the release > team for a separate transition slot for the new upstream SONAME. >
The only reverse dependencies are rtorrent and it needs an upgrade as well since there's a newer upstream version (it's the same upstream) depending on the newer version of libtorrent. Do I really need to do the transition or is it safe then? -- ⨳ PGP 0x13EC43EEB9AC8C43 ⨳ https://ghostbar.co
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
