Your message dated Sun, 05 Jun 2005 10:59:37 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed since 1.6.0-3
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 19 Nov 2003 17:04:18 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 19 11:04:17 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from 34.red-217-127-36.pooles.rima-tde.net (inspiron.openlc.org)
[217.127.36.34]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AMVkX-0005ld-00; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:04:17 -0600
Received: from falted by inspiron.openlc.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 1AMVkU-0001bt-00
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:04:14 +0100
From: Francesc Alted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: libhdf5 package convention names
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:04:14 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.0 required=4.0
tests=BAYES_60,HAS_PACKAGE
version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_15
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_15
(1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
Package: libhdf5-serial-1.6.1-0
Version: 1.6.1-2
Recently, I've made a package for pytables, that has a dependency of libhdf5
1.6 or higher. When I made the package (one month ago) the existing package
for libhdf5 was called libhdf5-serial-1.6.0-0 (for the serial version). But
now, after the upstream 1.6.1 appeared, you upgraded the name to
libhdf5-serial-1.6.1-0, which left my package with unsatisfiable
dependencies.
I've been reading all the difficulties you are having with the libhdf5
naming conventions in the reports for bug #202260. I understand that the
HDF5 ABI is changing, but I thought that this naming schema would let
libhdf5-1.6.1-0 and libhdf5-1.6.0-0 peacefully coexist. However, it seems
like if this two packages are not available at the same time (?).
Moreover, I think the NCSA people may change ABI between major and minor
versions (i.e. 1.4 to 1.6) but not on revision versions (i.e. 1.6.0 has the
same ABI than 1.6.1). Why not doing this versions compatibles? I'm rather a
beginner on debian, but I think this could be solved with a combination of
Replaces:, Provides: and Conflicts: headers. For example, say that in 1.6.0
packages you put:
Version: 1.6.0-3
Replaces: libhdf5-1.4
Provides: libhdf5-1.6
Conflicts: libhdf5-1.4
Then, a package for 1.6.1 would be:
Version: 1.6.1-1
Replaces: libhdf5-1.4
Provides: libhdf5-1.6
Conflicts: libhdf5-1.4
with that, applications would safely stablish a dependency on libhdf-1.6,
and made them working even with revision changes on upstream, which is a
better situation (IMO) than forcing a rebuild on the dependent packages.
Regards,
--
Francesc Alted
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 221699-done) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Jun 2005 09:00:12 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jun 05 02:00:12 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from heavensgate.debian.net (arrakis.localnet) [213.41.173.23]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1DeqzL-0002a7-00; Sun, 05 Jun 2005 02:00:12 -0700
Received: from joss by arrakis.localnet with local (Exim 4.50)
id 1Deqyp-0001JK-Vv
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 05 Jun 2005 10:59:40 +0200
Subject: fixed since 1.6.0-3
From: Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-3WuCMPFS3TtGbv1vPeCb"
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 10:59:37 +0200
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.2
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
--=-3WuCMPFS3TtGbv1vPeCb
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It is possible to install several versions at once since 1.6.0-3.
--=20
.''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\
: :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
--=-3WuCMPFS3TtGbv1vPeCb
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQBCor75rSla4ddfhTMRAsn3AJ41fffsKhq+ppVnlWesyL9pBiF/kACggYCo
ArhD/1OU+VU6a3ho5xZyXzQ=
=q84H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-3WuCMPFS3TtGbv1vPeCb--
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
