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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
pkg-kde-extras mailing list
pkg-kde-extras@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-extras

Reply via email to