|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > August 2004 > libtiff4 transition: please rebuild your packages
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
libtiff4 transition: please rebuild your packages
|
|
| Steve Langasek 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| There doesn't seem to have been an announcement here about it when
libtiff4 hit unstable. Better late than never. The new libtiff4
package has been in unstable for several days, and is available on all
architectures. Some people have already started uploading fixed
versions of their packages; if you maintain a package affected by this
transition and haven't reuploaded yet, your cooperation is appreciated.
You are encouraged to upload your rebuild-only packages with a medium
urgency, to help make this transition as quick as possible.
Starting Monday, RC bugs will be filed against the remaining packages
that have not yet transitioned to libtiff4, and NMUs will begin shortly
thereafter. (Some packages have already had RC bugs filed against them
independently.)
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 02:18:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> There doesn't seem to have been an announcement here about it when
> libtiff4 hit unstable. Better late than never. The new libtiff4
> package has been in unstable for several days, and is available on all
> architectures. Some people have already started uploading fixed
> versions of their packages; if you maintain a package affected by this
> transition and haven't reuploaded yet, your cooperation is appreciated.
> You are encouraged to upload your rebuild-only packages with a medium
> urgency, to help make this transition as quick as possible.
I'm a maintainer of asc which depends on libtiff3.
However it depends indirectly by libsdl-image1.2-dev.
SDL has been uploaded yesterday with the fixed dependencies, but with a low
priority. What will happen if I will upload my package with the medium
priority? I think it's useless cause it will have to wait for libsdl.
Any hints for unexperienced maintainer? ;)
regards
fEnIo
--
_ Bartosz Fenski | mailto:fenio@o2.pl | pgp:0x13fefc40 | IRC:fEnIo
_|_|_ 32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - w. malopolskie - Polska
(0 0) phone:+48602383548 | Slackware - the weakest link
ooO--(_)--Ooo http://skawina.eu.org | JID:fenio@jabber.org | RLU:172001
| |
| Steve Langasek 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 12:56:30PM +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 02:18:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I'm a maintainer of asc which depends on libtiff3.
> However it depends indirectly by libsdl-image1.2-dev.
> SDL has been uploaded yesterday with the fixed dependencies, but with a low
> priority. What will happen if I will upload my package with the medium
> priority? I think it's useless cause it will have to wait for libsdl.
> Any hints for unexperienced maintainer? ;)
All of these packages will have to go into testing together; so none of
them can go in until all are rebuilt. Because sdl-image1.2 was
uploaded with low urgency, the earliest libtiff4 can make it into sarge
is 11 Aug. If you upload asc today with low urgency, that will push the
migration back another day to 12 Aug; but if uploaded with medium
urgency, it won't (necessarily) delay the transition unless you wait
until August 6 before uploading.
Uploading with urgency=medium still has the benefit of making sure
*your* package isn't the one holding up the migration. ;)
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Steve Langasek 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 12:56:30PM +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 02:18:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I'm a maintainer of asc which depends on libtiff3.
> However it depends indirectly by libsdl-image1.2-dev.
> SDL has been uploaded yesterday with the fixed dependencies, but with a low
> priority. What will happen if I will upload my package with the medium
> priority? I think it's useless cause it will have to wait for libsdl.
> Any hints for unexperienced maintainer? ;)
BTW, if you have some comfort level with autotools, please consider
updating asc to use the latest version of libtool; I don't see anything
in asc that needs libtiff directly, so using a newer libtool (1.5.2-2 or
newer) will ensure you don't have to worry about transitions of image
libraries in the future.
For information on how to update the version of libtool used in your
package, please see
<http://people.debian.org/~keybuk/libtool-updating.html>.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Hamish Moffatt 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 04:06:47AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Uploading with urgency=medium still has the benefit of making sure
> *your* package isn't the one holding up the migration. ;)
Oops, I knew I forgot something. xastir has medium priority.
Still, I uploaded it a few days ago now.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Hamish Moffatt 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 12:56:30PM +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 02:18:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> I'm a maintainer of asc which depends on libtiff3.
> However it depends indirectly by libsdl-image1.2-dev.
>
> SDL has been uploaded yesterday with the fixed dependencies, but with a low
You'll need to build-dep on the new libsdl-image1.2-dev to ensure that
all the autobuilders do the right thing. I had the same issue with
xastir (only uses libtiff4 via imagemagick).
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Isaac Clerencia 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| | |
| Kurt Roeckx 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 09:37:53PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> You'll need to build-dep on the new libsdl-image1.2-dev to ensure that
> all the autobuilders do the right thing. I had the same issue with
> xastir (only uses libtiff4 via imagemagick).
There still is a xastir -> libgdal1-dev -> unixodbc-dev ->
gtkodbcconfig0 dependency
gtkodbcconfig0: Depends: gdk-imlib1 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: libgnome32 (>= 1.2.13-5) but it is not going to be installed
Depends: libgnomesupport0 (>= 1.2.13-5) but it is not going to be installed
Depends: libgnomeui32 (>= 1.4.2-3) but it is not going to be installed
And they all still have libtiff3g dependencies.
Kurt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steve Langasek 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 01:47:33PM +0200, Isaac Clerencia wrote:
> On Sunday 01 August 2004 13:37, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> One of my packages (wesnoth) depends on libsdl-image1.2-dev should I upload a
> new package? Should I build-depend on a versioned libsdl-image1.2-dev?
Only packages which have a dependency on libtiff3g need to be rebuilt.
The wesnoth package does not have such a dependency.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Hamish Moffatt 2004-08-01, 7:47 am |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 01:54:36PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 09:37:53PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> There still is a xastir -> libgdal1-dev -> unixodbc-dev ->
> gtkodbcconfig0 dependency
>
> gtkodbcconfig0: Depends: gdk-imlib1 but it is not going to be installed
> Depends: libgnome32 (>= 1.2.13-5) but it is not going to be installed
> Depends: libgnomesupport0 (>= 1.2.13-5) but it is not going to be installed
> Depends: libgnomeui32 (>= 1.4.2-3) but it is not going to be installed
>
> And they all still have libtiff3g dependencies.
Hmm. The new xastir package ended up depending on libtiff4 only though
so I think that's enough.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Henrique de Moraes Holschuh 2004-08-01, 5:50 pm |
| On Sun, 01 Aug 2004, Steve Langasek wrote:
> in asc that needs libtiff directly, so using a newer libtool (1.5.2-2 or
> newer) will ensure you don't have to worry about transitions of image
> libraries in the future.
Are we even allowing people to use anything older than libtool 1.5.6? I
thought 1.5.6 was a requirement to be policy compliant...
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Andreas Metzler 2004-08-01, 5:50 pm |
| On 2004-08-01 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Aug 2004, Steve Langasek wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Are we even allowing people to use anything older than libtool 1.5.6? I
> thought 1.5.6 was a requirement to be policy compliant...
No, there is no such policy.
cu andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Matt Zimmerman 2004-08-01, 5:50 pm |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 12:56:30PM +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> I'm a maintainer of asc which depends on libtiff3. However it depends
> indirectly by libsdl-image1.2-dev.
asc depends directly on libtiff3g. If it does not actually use libtiff
directly, it should not be linked with it, and you would not need to upload
your package at all.
--
- mdz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo 2004-08-02, 5:58 pm |
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 04:12:37AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
>
>
> BTW, if you have some comfort level with autotools, please consider
> updating asc to use the latest version of libtool; I don't see anything
> in asc that needs libtiff directly, so using a newer libtool (1.5.2-2 or
> newer) will ensure you don't have to worry about transitions of image
> libraries in the future.
>
> For information on how to update the version of libtool used in your
> package, please see
> <http://people.debian.org/~keybuk/libtool-updating.html>.
Some questions to the above.
Should I make this on my sources before packaging them and create new
orig.tar.gz file, or maybe old orig and bigger diff?
Or maybe during build process?
Some more verbose information would be very useful for me.
I'm not libtool expert unfortunatelly :/
regards
fEnIo
ps. sorry Steve for private mail
--
_ Bartosz Fenski | mailto:fenio@o2.pl | pgp:0x13fefc40 | IRC:fEnIo
_|_|_ 32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - w. malopolskie - Polska
(0 0) phone:+48602383548 | Slackware - the weakest link
ooO--(_)--Ooo http://skawina.eu.org | JID:fenio@jabber.org | RLU:172001
| |
| Steve Langasek 2004-08-02, 5:58 pm |
| On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 11:01:52PM +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 04:12:37AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Some questions to the above.
> Should I make this on my sources before packaging them and create new
> orig.tar.gz file, or maybe old orig and bigger diff?
> Or maybe during build process?
> Some more verbose information would be very useful for me.
> I'm not libtool expert unfortunatelly :/
Unless you are the upstream, it's usual to make thiis change in the
Debian diff. Be sure to add AM_MAINTAINER_MODE to configure.in if it
isn't already there, if you do this.
Of course, it's also a good thing to encourage your upstream to use a
newer version of libtool, but these are changes that shouldn't always
wait for a new upstream release.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
|
|
|
|
|