[if you want the bug reporter to see your message you must explicitly set it]
On Friday 22 January 2010 12:19:56 Dave Beckett wrote: > > Your package builds a PHP extension but doesn't depend on phpapi-*. > > This is incorrect and will break it on PHP transitions, such as the > > soon-to-come PHP 5.3 transition. > > Why is it incorrect and where was this announced and documented? You > should have filed a wishlist or lower priority bug well in advance of > rushing to do a 1-day NMU. Why: because otherwise a php version with a different abi will migrate to testing, break your extension and only users will be able to tell because your extension will no longer be loaded. When and where: there's no finished webapps policy, but you can see that the vast majority of php extensions do correctly depend on it. > > It's not clear what you propose to change (so therefore I cannot do it > myself) but if it is just debian/rules and debian/control, go ahead with > the NMU. > If you would at least take a look at any php extension package... $ apt-cache show php5-remctl | grep Depends Depends: libc6 (>= 2.1.3), libremctl1 (>= 2.10), phpapi-20060613+lfs $ apt-cache show php5-imagick | grep Depends Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.6-6~), [...], phpapi-20060613+lfs, ucf and so on. The change is exactly what I said on my original email, just make debian/rules generate a substvar that will lead to the binary package depend on phpapi-$(php-config5 --phpapi .) Regards, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer www.debian.org - get.debian.net
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
