[Pkg-octave-devel] CXX_ABI
Thomas Weber
thomas.weber.mail at gmail.com
Tue Jul 29 22:06:10 UTC 2008
On 29/07/08 21:56 +0200, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> * John W. Eaton <jwe at bevo.che.wisc.edu> [2008-07-29 15:47]:
>
> > On 29-Jul-2008, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> >
> > | Do you think that this bug is important enough so that octave3.0-headers
> > | must be fixed in the forthcoming Debian release (lenny)? Note that lenny
> > | has been frozen some days ago, but it is possible to get packages fixed,
> > | provided that:
> > |
> > | 1) The bug is release-critical. That is easy to do: we just file a bug
> > | report with severity level "serious" and explain why.
> > |
> > | 2) The fix is simple and has no side effects. This is also easy to do
> > | changing some lines in debian/rules.
> > |
> > | What do you think?
> >
> > It will affect anyone who upgrades from the broken package to one that
> > is not broken, as they will get the mysterious "undefined" error when
> > attempting to use a function defined in a .oct file that was built
> > with a buggy package. Whether this issue is important enough to fix
> > the package is up to you.
>
> In an afterthought, I do not think that fixing the package is desirable,
> because we would then have to rebuild ll the other packages that have *.oct
> files and depend on octave3.0. Am I right?
I'm for fixing this. We only need to upload a fixed octave version, the
rebuilds of the other packages can be done by the release team (with a
dep-wait to ensure a correct octave version).
Did the autoconf behaviour change or did we always have this ABI problem?
Thomas
More information about the Pkg-octave-devel
mailing list