On 2026-04-11 17:36:29 +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > Control: affects -1 + src:libsodium > User: [email protected] > Usertags: transition > > Hi RMs, > > There's a quick transition for libsodium, but I'm open to talk about > it. Reason is that there's an even newer libsodium soname release > that's not yet packaged. > Would it be a problem if libsodium is updated to 1.0.20 already in > experimental and then package release 1.0.22 causing another > transition? Should I go for a direct update to 1.0.22 instead? > > All reverse build dependencies were built correctly. I had a problem > with vim, due to one of its self-tests saying it can't start a GUI or > something like that. I didn't investigate it further. For some reason, > I always have a problem with rebuilding vim due to its self-testing.
If it's not too much of a hassle, I'd prefer to directly go to 1.0.22. There are for arch: all packages involved that require handling. The transition will be less work if we only have to handle them once instead of twice. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
