On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 15:46:53 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:

> >I've prepared an NMU for gdal (versioned as 1.9.0-3.1) and uploaded
> >it to DELAYED/2. Please feel free to tell me if I should delay it
> >longer.
> I see there is a binary package libgdal-ruby1.8 from source package
> gdal. Do we need both?

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "both" here?

I was a bit confused when building the package because of the many
similar versions involved, maybe the same happened to you?

What we have is:
- source package gdal, upstream version 1.9.0
- a binary package libgdal-ruby1.8 (ruby1.8 bindings)
- a binary package libgdal-ruby (meta package depending on

Neither the amount nor the names or versions of source or binary
packages have changed in this NMU (well, except for the .1 of
The change is only to make the libgdal-ruby1.8 package build if
ruby1.9x happens to be installed.

(And no libgdal-ruby1.9 package was or is built; just files like 
look a bit weird when dealing with ruby1.8 and ruby1.9 :))


 .''`.  Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06
 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer  -  http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'  Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   NP: Paul McCartney: Jet

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Pkg-grass-devel mailing list

Reply via email to