Hi, [sorry for yet another one, i clicked sent too early...]
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 03:01:04PM +0100, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 02:22:20PM +0100, Maarten van Gompel wrote: > > > > On second thought, I read https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/64bit-time > > and > > checked the updated Frog sources, there is no time_t exposed at all anymore > > in the new version I'm packaging. > > That's nice. > > > So if I understand things correctly, the new > > libfrog3 library does not need the t64 transition and I can revert > > https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/frog/-/commit/2bbda8d92d40b96a216e8d8db972a9589f8df02f > > ? > > > > > Afaik the plan is to keep the binary packages named lib<foo>t64 (reading > > > https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/64bit-time ); this helps executing > > > the > > > transition. > > > > I'll rebase so the libfrog2t64 patch is included, but it'll be > > immediately superseded by libfrog3. > > Upcoming stable release could likely ship both frog2 and frog3. E.g. if > testing around release-time ships binaries build-depending upon frog2, this > will happen. Wow, having just read Message-Id: <cyumsr5qivhf.1trnk0g75u...@anaproy.nl> to debian-science, we might indeed succeed in shipping upcoming Debian stable without frog2. Bye, Joost -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
