On miércoles, 2 de noviembre de 2016 9:15:13 P. M. ART Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 02:02:52PM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > > On miércoles, 2 de noviembre de 2016 10:00:43 A. M. ART Bernhard Schmidt > > > > wrote: > > > Kurt Roeckx <k...@roeckx.be> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > There might also be packages for which the changes are more > > > > involved and that can't be fixed in time for the release. If you > > > > want to stay with OpenSSL 1.0.2 you need to change your Build-Depends > > > > from libssl-dev to libssl1.0-dev. > > > > > > Almost expected, this fails where another build-dep pulls in libssl-dev, > > > i.e. adjusting build-dep for src:asterisk > > > > Today we the Qt/KDE team were hit but this same thing in the middle of our > > transition: libpq-dev pulls in libssl-dev which makes Qt5 FTBFS. > > > > *Not impliying bad faith here:* moreoever when we started the transition > > we > > depended upon libssl-dev so I don't know why the ssl transition got > > started. Possibly a human mistake, which is fair. > > > > It would have been much more simple if libssl1.1-dev was provided and > > libssl- dev be kept as it was. > > > > Can this be considered? > > I don't think having libssl1-1-dev vs libssl1.0-dev is going to > make much differences in the end. The build conflicts will always > have to be sorted out.
But wouldn't have broken packages that didn't did the switch, like qt5. Another story would habe been if this had happened much earlier in the stretch cycle, or in the next cycle. But oh well, I guess it's worthless to discuss this now, let's use the energy to get things working. -- All of us have bad luck and good luck. The man who persists through the bad luck - who keeps right on going - is the man who is there when the good luck comes - and is ready to receive it. Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.