On Sunday 11 October 2009 02:18:52 Pascal de Bruijn wrote: > Hi, Hi Pascal,
> I just mailed with Andrew Zabolotny, the author of LensFun. He's getting > current svn in shape for release as 0.2.4. I see they have released in the last couple of days. > The new release of course has to be repackaged. No major changes as far > as I know... > > I think we can drop most if not all patches for 0.2.4. Excellent. What about the remaining two in debian.svn.org? 90-lensfun-db-update-rel-to-svn65.dpatch 91-lensfun-db-update-svn65-to-pmjdebruijn.dpatch They don't apply cleanly to 0.2.4. > However, there are some packaging issues I'm not entirely sure of... > > The library is now called liblensfun0, I'm assuming that will remain the > same as long as the API is unchanged. It will only need to be renamed to > liblensfun1 if the API has changed, right? Yes. Have a look at the Debian library packing guide: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html > Though there are some references to 0.2.3, in the debian package files: > > rules:DEB_DH_MAKESHLIBS_ARGS_ALL := -- -v0.2.3 > liblensfun0.symbols: lf_lens_...@base 0.2.3 My understanding is that the symbols file only details the first version that specific symbols appear. Thus the correct answer is to leave the symbols file at 0.2.3. > The rules file is easily adapted, but how would I regenerate the symbols > file? I don't think you need to change the rules file as 0.2.3 and 0.2.4 are binary compatible, ie you can leave it at 0.2.3. Mark
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ pkg-kde-extras mailing list email@example.com http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-extras