[Pkg-mono-devel] RFS: libanculus-sharp

[David Paleino]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 12:49:58 +0200, Mirco Bauer wrote:

> On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 14:47:42 +0200
> David Paleino <d.paleino at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:19:00 +0200, Mirco Bauer wrote:
> > 
> > > [..] you can't re-use a debian revision (-1) that is already in the
> > > debian archive. [..]
> > 
> > Apropos, I've just noticed that:
> > 
> > $ LANG=C apt-cache policy libanculus-sharp
> > libanculus-sharp:
> >   Installed: (none)
> >   Candidate: 0.3.1-1
> >   Version table:
> >      0.3.1-1 0
> >         500 http://ftp.debian.org unstable/main Packages
> > $
> > 
> > It seems like the archive currently has a "libanculus-sharp" binary
> > package, which is obviously wrong. The -2 version, in fact, provides
> > (as per Pkg-Cli-Libs policy) a libanculus0.3-cil binary package.
> > 
> > Should I request removal of the old package? Should I prepare an
> > "upgrade path"?
> 
> A removal request against ftp.debian.org is AFAIK not needed for
> dropped binary packages in unstable. The ftp-master time checks for
> packages not build from source packages, but a removal hint might get
> their attention faster.

ACK.

> Of course this only matters once the new version passed NEW :)
> (which it didn't yet)

Yes, sure, it was just to know it in advance.

> > I suppose this would suffice:
> > 
> > --->8---
> > Package: libanculus0.3-cil
> > Provides: libanculus-sharp
> > Conflicts: libanculus-sharp
> > [..]
> > 
> > Package: libanculus-sharp
> > Depends: libanculus0.3-cil
> > [..]
> > ---8<---
> > 
> > Am I wrong?
> 
> This would be the right thing for packages with reverse dependencies,
> as there are not rdeps in testing nor unstable, it's unneeded.

Ok, understood.

Thanks for the clarification,
David

-- 
 . ''`.  Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mono-devel/attachments/20081003/8e2eedbd/attachment.pgp