> * George Danchev <[email protected]>, 2009-09-04, 18:06: > >http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libvigraimpex/libvigraimpex_1.6.0-2.dsc > >> > >> I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. > > > >I'm not that optimistic with the C++ code and symbols files. > > > >First, yours appear to be architecture dependent: > >http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/mole/seedsymbols?pkgname=libvigraimpex2ldbl > > Yes, I'm aware of that: > > $ grep arch= debian/libvigraimpex2ldbl.symbols | c++filt > (arch=!alpha !amd64 !ia64 !s390)vigra::void_vector_base::resize(unsigned int)@Base 1.5.0 > (arch=alpha amd64 ia64 s390)vigra::void_vector_base::resize(unsigned long)@Base 1.5.0 > > >Second, there are problems: see #521569 > > Yes, using -c 2 or higher is a bit risky. But I don't do such things.
Yes, that is correct. > >and the whole thread at: > >http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/04/msg00297.html > > Right, but since #521551 is fixed, providing symbols files for C++ > libraries is not such a big issue anymore. (That reminds me that I am > missing versioned build dependency on dpkg-dev.) Very good. You have a point with regard to #521551, so gimmi some time to investigate and line up with it. > >Third, as I can see from debian/rules, dh_makeshlibs won't pass any check > >option to dpkg-gensymbols and the default -c1 is used which is a request for > >FTBFS on certain architectures in that case. > > > >So, I suggest we remove the symbols part or simply disable it (pass -c0 to > >dpkg-gensymbols, as I did with one of my library packages bobcat) until a > >better solution is found or GCC people accept the solution provided at: > >http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36022 > > I can pass -c0 to dpkg-gensymbols if you insist, but I don't think this is > really necessary. Don't bother for the time being, apparentl -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
