Bug#464320: Request for binNMUs for libpcre3 [Fwd: Bug#463413: problem solved by recompiling the package !]
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 08:00:44PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: > > > Is it clear at all yet whether the ABI breakage is in the C++ wrapper > > > libpcrecpp0 or in the main library? > > Yes, it's in the C++ wrapper. > That limits the problem a lot. (Etch has only a single external rdev to > it.) Is there any reaction by upstream yet? > I am cc ing debian-release to make sure they do not (yet) act on the > rebuild request, followups probably need not go there. Yes, I pointed these issues out to Luk on IRC. If libpcrecpp has undergone an ABI change, the package name should be changed to reflect this before scheduling any binNMUs. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#464320: Request for binNMUs for libpcre3 [Fwd: Bug#463413: problem solved by recompiling the package !]
On 2008-02-06 Mark Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 06:54:47PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: > > It simple rebuild would still break partial upgrades. > Yes, I agree. I don't think rebuilding the reverse dependencies is the > right solution. > The changelog suggests that the ABI change is un-necessary (it was an > attempt to fix a problem on windows). We could just revert the change, > but that would mean we had a different ABI from other distributions. I'm > not sure what the best solution is here. What if anything have other > distros done? Most of them probably have not experieneced the problem. Ubuntu is at 7.4, fedora devel at 7.3. > > Is it clear at all yet whether the ABI breakage is in the C++ wrapper > > libpcrecpp0 or in the main library? > Yes, it's in the C++ wrapper. That limits the problem a lot. (Etch has only a single external rdev to it.) Is there any reaction by upstream yet? I am cc ing debian-release to make sure they do not (yet) act on the rebuild request, followups probably need not go there. cu andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#464320: Request for binNMUs for libpcre3 [Fwd: Bug#463413: problem solved by recompiling the package !]
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 06:54:47PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: > It simple rebuild would still break partial upgrades. Yes, I agree. I don't think rebuilding the reverse dependencies is the right solution. The changelog suggests that the ABI change is un-necessary (it was an attempt to fix a problem on windows). We could just revert the change, but that would mean we had a different ABI from other distributions. I'm not sure what the best solution is here. What if anything have other distros done? > Is it clear at all yet whether the ABI breakage is in the C++ wrapper > libpcrecpp0 or in the main library? Yes, it's in the C++ wrapper. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#464320: Request for binNMUs for libpcre3 [Fwd: Bug#463413: problem solved by recompiling the package !]
On 2008-02-06 Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please schedule binNMUs for all reverse dependencies of libpcre3 on all > architectures. There seems to be an ABI change in the last upstream: > dep-wait (libpcre3-dev >= 7.6-1) > Original Message > Subject: Bug#463413: problem solved by recompiling the package ! > Resent-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 23:48:03 +, Tue, 05 Feb 2008 23:48:03 > + > Resent-From: Jérémy Lal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Resent-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-CC: Sebastien Bacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:45:42 +0100 > From: Jérémy Lal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Jérémy Lal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > i had the exact same error message, and a fresh compilation from source > solved it. > (unstable repository of course) It simple rebuild would still break partial upgrades. Is it clear at all yet whether the ABI breakage is in the C++ wrapper libpcrecpp0 or in the main library? cu andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
