[pkg-squid-devel] libecap 1.0.0

[Amos Jeffries]

On 11/05/2015 9:56 p.m., Luigi Gangitano wrote:
> Hi Amos,
> 
> Thanks for your work on libecap, I was going to upgrade it after the weekend but found you already did. ;-)
> 
> A couple of notes:
> 
> - I changed the repository layout before you did the upgrade to match the pkg-squid3 layout (upstream/release branches for each release so we can later easily backport/security update packages). You should set your ~/.gbp.conf to match this change, otherwise upstream upgrades will not go in the correct branch (should be upstream/sid) and tags would not be created;
> - I merged the 1.0.0 upstream into upstream/sid to fix the inconsistency coming from the above error and tagged upstream/1.0.0

Strange. I used the same ~/.gbp.conf and process as for squid3. Oh well,
thank you for cleaning up after me mistakes.

> - your change in libecapN package name is correct;
> - since squid3 is the only package depending on libecap we should simply upload the new package to the repository, this will break squid3 until a new package is uploaded but everything should be fine after that.
> 

It should not. I renamed the -dev package too. So the old libecap2-dev
package will remain in the repository for building squid3.

The transition guidelines you linked below say not to rename the -dev,
but that seems focussed on the -dev without soname embeded. Maybe we
should change it to that un-numbered form?

==> You will need to make the call about a final name for the -dev
before upload.


> I will now check for a policy regarding transitions, but it looks like (https://wiki.debian.org/TransitionBestPractices) we don’t need any special care.
> 
> Will look into it and upload the new package if everything is set.


There is one libecap bug I ran into building with clang. I've added a
patch developed by the FreeBSD libecap maintainer which libecap upstream
(Alex) referred me to while he works on a final fix.

Amos