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

[Mirco Bauer]

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.

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

> 
> 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.

> 
> Kindly,
> David
> 


-- 
Regards,

Mirco 'meebey' Bauer

PGP-Key ID: 0xEEF946C8

FOSS Developer    meebey at meebey.net  http://www.meebey.net/
PEAR Developer    meebey at php.net     http://pear.php.net/
Debian Developer  meebey at debian.org  http://www.debian.org/