On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 03:13:28AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hi José Carlos, > > FWIW I'm not content with the implemented solution as far as inclusion in > etch is concerned. Previous versions of the package clearly did not need > libpth20, the new version does and the effect on the package's behavior as a > result of this new library dep seem to be unknown. >
Basically I agree, but due to time constrains I didn't have to check or apply other way to build it. Anayway, as it generates different .so files for each library, I didn't think that it would imply a problem for etch. > The package also includes this change: > > @@ -5,9 +5,6 @@ > # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. > #export DH_VERBOSE=1 > > -# This is the debhelper compatability version to use. > -export DH_COMPAT=3 > - > # C compiler information > CC = gcc > CFLAGS = -Wall -g > > This is a behavior change from the previous version of the package, because > DH_COMPAT takes precedence over debian/compat, so this is very much not a > change that's suitable during a freeze. > Mmmm. I made that change, but I though that I had rolled it back later. > So unless the security team overrules me, I don't think this version of the > package should be allowed into etch as-is. > > (It's also currently held out of etch because it depends on the > security-fixed gnupg which is not yet available, but that problem should > clear up on its own anyway with no effort on your part.) > > BTW, this is a regression between gpgme1.0 1.1.2-2 and 1.1.2-3; I believe > the cause is the re-rolled '10_relibtoolize.patch', which AFAICS there was > no reason to change in a security update. The only reason is that the package was not able to build without that rehashed 10_relibtoolize patch. I will try again tonight to build the package with the older patch, perhaps it was a problem on my side only. BTW, if you want make any test, you can find my repo at http://svn.tribulaciones.org Thanks -- Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
