Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofb...@debian.org> writes: > the library has been renamed and conflicting with the non-v5 version, because > of the libstdc++ transition. > > backporting to jessie and wheezy (where the transition didn't happen), means > you have to revert that change, because otherwise the package will be > uninstallable > with all of the reverse dependencies, because of: > > Package: libxml-security-c17v5 > Conflicts: > libxml-security-c17, > Replaces: > libxml-security-c17, > > in this case, oldstable has the library with a different soname (c16), > so I'm not sure if the rename is worth the effort or not, please ask > on -mentors, -devel or wherever you find more appropriate.
It'd probably make sense to start with a jessie backport, where this change is necessary, then branch off the wheezy backport from that, and do the PKG_INSTALLDIR change only. > also, can the new patch be added to the package in unstable too? > - * [aba87f7] New patch > Remove-PKG_INSTALLDIR-to-build-with-older-pkg-config.patch In principle it could, but it was added in the latest revision with the very purpose of getting it tested before upstreaming. -- Feri