Re: [otb] 02/02: update amd64 symbols for 5.2
On 12/23/2015 12:00 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: On 23-12-15 11:36, Rashad Kanavath wrote: --- a/debian/libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1.symbols +++ b/debian/libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1.symbols @@ -1,21591 +1,20415 @@ -# SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 5.0.0 amd64 i386 -libOTBApplicationEngine-5.0.so.1 libotbapplicationengine-5.0-1 #MINVER# ... +# SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 5.2.0 amd64 +libOTBApplicationEngine-5.2.so.1 libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1 #MINVER# We renaming symbols files for a new SONAME, you also need to edit the dependency line in the symbols file to match the name library SONAME and package name. For this example that would become: # SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 5.0.0 amd64 i386 libOTBApplicationEngine-5.2.so.1 libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1 #MINVER# dpkg-gensymbols will then keep the version history in the symbols file instead of generating a completely new file for library SONAME. You have now lost which symbols where introduced in 5.0 and not changed in 5.2. Okay. I had removed and generated new symbol files!. Should I revert back the files and then update them again? since package was not uploaded anywhere, I did this way. This is quite similar to the renamed lintian overrides, just renaming the files is not sufficient, you also need to make minimal edits to the files. I will correct this right away. Maybe we can use a .in file. What do you think ? Also try to keep your commits as single logical changes, the spelling patch update does not belong in this commit. spelling patch was a disaster on my side. It took some time for me to get into the quilt workflow. I promise I will be careful next time. http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-commit-policy Please review your changes before pushing them to Alioth, this gives you the opportunity to rebase your changes into a well formed patch series with logical changes per commit. This eases the review burden significantly. Kind Regards, Bas ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
Re: [otb] 02/02: update amd64 symbols for 5.2
On 23-12-15 15:04, Rashad Kanavath wrote: > On 12/23/2015 12:00 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: >> On 23-12-15 11:36, Rashad Kanavath wrote: >>> --- a/debian/libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1.symbols >>> +++ b/debian/libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1.symbols >>> @@ -1,21591 +1,20415 @@ >>> -# SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 5.0.0 amd64 i386 >>> -libOTBApplicationEngine-5.0.so.1 libotbapplicationengine-5.0-1 #MINVER# >>> ... >>> +# SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 5.2.0 amd64 >>> +libOTBApplicationEngine-5.2.so.1 libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1 #MINVER# >> We renaming symbols files for a new SONAME, you also need to edit the >> dependency line in the symbols file to match the name library SONAME and >> package name. >> >> For this example that would become: >> >> # SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 5.0.0 amd64 i386 >> libOTBApplicationEngine-5.2.so.1 libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1 #MINVER# >> >> dpkg-gensymbols will then keep the version history in the symbols file >> instead of generating a completely new file for library SONAME. You have >> now lost which symbols where introduced in 5.0 and not changed in 5.2. > > Okay. I had removed and generated new symbol files!. Should I revert > back the files and then update them again? > > since package was not uploaded anywhere, I did this way. Because the packages has been uploaded to the Debian archive, you don't have to revert the symbols change, only if you really want to do it correctly. Just make sure to follow this procedure next time. It's quite valuable to see that reverse dependencies don't actually use the new features by using the lower version in their dependencies. You see this for GDAL rdeps for example, most depend on libgdal1i (>= 1.8.0) because they don't use the features introduced in later versions (yet). >> This is quite similar to the renamed lintian overrides, just renaming >> the files is not sufficient, you also need to make minimal edits to the >> files. > > I will correct this right away. Maybe we can use a .in file. What do you > think ? Using templates for the lintian overrides too makes sense. >> Also try to keep your commits as single logical changes, the spelling >> patch update does not belong in this commit. > > spelling patch was a disaster on my side. It took some time for me to > get into the quilt workflow. > > I promise I will be careful next time. I generally rebase my changes before pushing them to Alioth to make the changes easier to review. Consider doing the same. Rebasing is one of the core features of git, don't be afraid to use it. Just make sure you only rebase the changes that haven't been pushed yet, rebasing changes that are available on Alioth already will complicate updating all the working copies out there. There is also a good argument to not rebase, and keep a messy history to reflect the messy nature of development. But I strongly prefer a clean history for the packaging changes which make it easier for the lurkers on the list to learn by example. Kind Regards, Bas -- GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1 ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
Re: [otb] 02/02: update amd64 symbols for 5.2
On 23-12-15 11:36, Rashad Kanavath wrote: > --- a/debian/libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1.symbols > +++ b/debian/libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1.symbols > @@ -1,21591 +1,20415 @@ > -# SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 5.0.0 amd64 i386 > -libOTBApplicationEngine-5.0.so.1 libotbapplicationengine-5.0-1 #MINVER# > ... > +# SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 5.2.0 amd64 > +libOTBApplicationEngine-5.2.so.1 libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1 #MINVER# We renaming symbols files for a new SONAME, you also need to edit the dependency line in the symbols file to match the name library SONAME and package name. For this example that would become: # SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 5.0.0 amd64 i386 libOTBApplicationEngine-5.2.so.1 libotbapplicationengine-5.2-1 #MINVER# dpkg-gensymbols will then keep the version history in the symbols file instead of generating a completely new file for library SONAME. You have now lost which symbols where introduced in 5.0 and not changed in 5.2. This is quite similar to the renamed lintian overrides, just renaming the files is not sufficient, you also need to make minimal edits to the files. Also try to keep your commits as single logical changes, the spelling patch update does not belong in this commit. http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-commit-policy Please review your changes before pushing them to Alioth, this gives you the opportunity to rebase your changes into a well formed patch series with logical changes per commit. This eases the review burden significantly. Kind Regards, Bas -- GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1 ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel