Bug#753079: transition: librime
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 00:08:28 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: But this seems toi be a bug porter amd GCC maintainer has to address. If they can not, we should drop armel from Debian. No, just because some random c++11 thing doesn't work on armel doesn't mean we drop the arch. What it means is packages get to work without it until it's fixed. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#753079: transition: librime
On 11/07/14 17:08, Osamu Aoki wrote: Hi, On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 06:12:18PM -0400, Guo Yixuan wrote: On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org wrote: On 03/07/14 21:36, Guo Yixuan wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Osamu Aoki osamu_aoki_h...@nifty.com I will upload new git head when prompted. Is it ready? Yes, it is. (I just noticed you already uploaded it. Thanks a lot!) And it has failed on armel because of #727621. Thank you for noting this. It seems to be a rather difficult bug in gcc. Thanks from me too. But this seems toi be a bug porter amd GCC maintainer has to address. If they can not, we should drop armel from Debian. Unless we get some workaround patch, this is not something we can do much about. In the case of librime, the rdeps (fcitx-rime and ibus-rime) have never been built on armel. So you can ask for the removal of the outdated librime armel binaries (through a bug against ftp.debian.org) and then librime would be able to migrate. And when the armel issue is fixed and librime builds there, those binaries will migrate automatically. Or you can make librime build on armel, like you mentioned in another mail. That would of course be preferred. Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#753079: transition: librime
Hi, On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 06:12:18PM -0400, Guo Yixuan wrote: On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org wrote: On 03/07/14 21:36, Guo Yixuan wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Osamu Aoki osamu_aoki_h...@nifty.com I will upload new git head when prompted. Is it ready? Yes, it is. (I just noticed you already uploaded it. Thanks a lot!) And it has failed on armel because of #727621. Thank you for noting this. It seems to be a rather difficult bug in gcc. Thanks from me too. But this seems toi be a bug porter amd GCC maintainer has to address. If they can not, we should drop armel from Debian. Unless we get some workaround patch, this is not something we can do much about. Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#753079: transition: librime
On 03/07/14 21:36, Guo Yixuan wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Osamu Aoki osamu_aoki_h...@nifty.com I will upload new git head when prompted. Is it ready? Yes, it is. (I just noticed you already uploaded it. Thanks a lot!) And it has failed on armel because of #727621. Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#753079: transition: librime
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org wrote: On 03/07/14 21:36, Guo Yixuan wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Osamu Aoki osamu_aoki_h...@nifty.com I will upload new git head when prompted. Is it ready? Yes, it is. (I just noticed you already uploaded it. Thanks a lot!) And it has failed on armel because of #727621. Thank you for noting this. It seems to be a rather difficult bug in gcc. Yixuan
Bug#753079: transition: librime
Hi, On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 07:56:49PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: The renaming is due to a backward-incompatible API change in librime 1.0, where some struct members changed types. So I followed the recommendation here.[1] [1] https://wiki.debian.org/TransitionBestPractices That advice is wrong. Renaming the -dev package makes sense if you're going to keep the two versions of the library for a while, e.g. libgtk2.0-dev and libgtk-3-dev, which usually means you renamed the source package (gtk+2.0 and gtk+3.0 in my example). In your case, you want to keep the same librime-dev package name. Can you change it back? I will review and edit that wiki page, thanks for the link. Very good. That is my thought but there was no external resource backing it. Havoc has interesting post on multi dev library case as below, Jere is what I wrote previously ... I do agree to use the versioned -dev when these 2 -dev package are made to be co-installable and useful in such shape. This happens with major This practically means source package with different name. libraries. For this, it require us to do more than bumping number in -dev package name. See example: http://ometer.com/parallel.html (HP used to work at R-H and used to be with Debian as I understand) I will upload new git head when prompted. Is it ready? Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#753079: transition: librime
Hi, On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Osamu Aoki osamu_aoki_h...@nifty.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 07:56:49PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: The renaming is due to a backward-incompatible API change in librime 1.0, where some struct members changed types. So I followed the recommendation here.[1] [1] https://wiki.debian.org/TransitionBestPractices That advice is wrong. Renaming the -dev package makes sense if you're going to keep the two versions of the library for a while, e.g. libgtk2.0-dev and libgtk-3-dev, which usually means you renamed the source package (gtk+2.0 and gtk+3.0 in my example). In your case, you want to keep the same librime-dev package name. Can you change it back? I will review and edit that wiki page, thanks for the link. Very good. That is my thought but there was no external resource backing it. Havoc has interesting post on multi dev library case as below, Jere is what I wrote previously ... I do agree to use the versioned -dev when these 2 -dev package are made to be co-installable and useful in such shape. This happens with major This practically means source package with different name. libraries. For this, it require us to do more than bumping number in -dev package name. See example: http://ometer.com/parallel.html (HP used to work at R-H and used to be with Debian as I understand) Thank you for this reference. As I understand, our current advice should be: you never need to change the name of the -dev package, as long as the source package name is not changed. Is this correct? I will upload new git head when prompted. Is it ready? Yes, it is. (I just noticed you already uploaded it. Thanks a lot!) Yixuan
Bug#753079: transition: librime
On 01/07/14 14:24, Guo Yixuan wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org wrote: On 29/06/14 19:31, Guo Yixuan wrote: Hi, On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net wrote: On 2014-06-29 05:34, Guo Yixuan (郭溢譞) wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear Release Team, We're planning to upload a new version of librime, which has ABI/API breaks. The affected packages are few, and all under IME team's maintenance, and we're mostly ready to have sourceful upload for these packages: Source: fcitx-rime Source: ibus-rime Ben file: [...] Hi, Could you please upload the new version of librime to experimental? This should automatically generate a simple tracker for your (called auto-librime). ~Niels Osamu just helped to upload it (to unstable), so it's now in the new queue. [1] Please next time upload to experimental when you're asked to do so. In this case it's fine, I verified that there are no conflicts with other transitions, so there's no need to cancel the upload. Thank you! Why did you rename the -dev package from librime-dev to librime1-dev? Having an unversioned -dev package (e.g. librime-dev) is generally preferred. A versioned one makes sense when there are two versions of the library simultaneously, but that is not the case here. The renaming is due to a backward-incompatible API change in librime 1.0, where some struct members changed types. So I followed the recommendation here.[1] [1] https://wiki.debian.org/TransitionBestPractices That advice is wrong. Renaming the -dev package makes sense if you're going to keep the two versions of the library for a while, e.g. libgtk2.0-dev and libgtk-3-dev, which usually means you renamed the source package (gtk+2.0 and gtk+3.0 in my example). In your case, you want to keep the same librime-dev package name. Can you change it back? I will review and edit that wiki page, thanks for the link. Regards, Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#753079: transition: librime
Hi, On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org wrote: On 01/07/14 14:24, Guo Yixuan wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org wrote: On 29/06/14 19:31, Guo Yixuan wrote: Hi, On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net wrote: On 2014-06-29 05:34, Guo Yixuan (郭溢譞) wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear Release Team, We're planning to upload a new version of librime, which has ABI/API breaks. The affected packages are few, and all under IME team's maintenance, and we're mostly ready to have sourceful upload for these packages: Source: fcitx-rime Source: ibus-rime Ben file: [...] Hi, Could you please upload the new version of librime to experimental? This should automatically generate a simple tracker for your (called auto-librime). ~Niels Osamu just helped to upload it (to unstable), so it's now in the new queue. [1] Please next time upload to experimental when you're asked to do so. In this case it's fine, I verified that there are no conflicts with other transitions, so there's no need to cancel the upload. Thank you! Why did you rename the -dev package from librime-dev to librime1-dev? Having an unversioned -dev package (e.g. librime-dev) is generally preferred. A versioned one makes sense when there are two versions of the library simultaneously, but that is not the case here. The renaming is due to a backward-incompatible API change in librime 1.0, where some struct members changed types. So I followed the recommendation here.[1] [1] https://wiki.debian.org/TransitionBestPractices That advice is wrong. Renaming the -dev package makes sense if you're going to keep the two versions of the library for a while, e.g. libgtk2.0-dev and libgtk-3-dev, which usually means you renamed the source package (gtk+2.0 and gtk+3.0 in my example). In your case, you want to keep the same librime-dev package name. Can you change it back? I will review and edit that wiki page, thanks for the link. Regards, Emilio I just reverted it in git. [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-ime/librime.git;a=commitdiff;h=7551e2ee37f2b9a1ab8f1c4128c161c6d2ac11c3;hp=6f97e02e82a5854f829c83162ec69dfb66398c93 @Osamu, could you help me to upload it? Thank you! Regards, Yixuan
Bug#753079: transition: librime
On 29/06/14 19:31, Guo Yixuan wrote: Hi, On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net wrote: On 2014-06-29 05:34, Guo Yixuan (郭溢譞) wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear Release Team, We're planning to upload a new version of librime, which has ABI/API breaks. The affected packages are few, and all under IME team's maintenance, and we're mostly ready to have sourceful upload for these packages: Source: fcitx-rime Source: ibus-rime Ben file: [...] Hi, Could you please upload the new version of librime to experimental? This should automatically generate a simple tracker for your (called auto-librime). ~Niels Osamu just helped to upload it (to unstable), so it's now in the new queue. [1] Please next time upload to experimental when you're asked to do so. In this case it's fine, I verified that there are no conflicts with other transitions, so there's no need to cancel the upload. Why did you rename the -dev package from librime-dev to librime1-dev? Having an unversioned -dev package (e.g. librime-dev) is generally preferred. A versioned one makes sense when there are two versions of the library simultaneously, but that is not the case here. Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#753079: transition: librime
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org wrote: On 29/06/14 19:31, Guo Yixuan wrote: Hi, On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net wrote: On 2014-06-29 05:34, Guo Yixuan (郭溢譞) wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear Release Team, We're planning to upload a new version of librime, which has ABI/API breaks. The affected packages are few, and all under IME team's maintenance, and we're mostly ready to have sourceful upload for these packages: Source: fcitx-rime Source: ibus-rime Ben file: [...] Hi, Could you please upload the new version of librime to experimental? This should automatically generate a simple tracker for your (called auto-librime). ~Niels Osamu just helped to upload it (to unstable), so it's now in the new queue. [1] Please next time upload to experimental when you're asked to do so. In this case it's fine, I verified that there are no conflicts with other transitions, so there's no need to cancel the upload. Thank you! Why did you rename the -dev package from librime-dev to librime1-dev? Having an unversioned -dev package (e.g. librime-dev) is generally preferred. A versioned one makes sense when there are two versions of the library simultaneously, but that is not the case here. The renaming is due to a backward-incompatible API change in librime 1.0, where some struct members changed types. So I followed the recommendation here.[1] [1] https://wiki.debian.org/TransitionBestPractices Yixuan
Bug#753079: transition: librime
On 2014-06-29 05:34, Guo Yixuan (郭溢譞) wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear Release Team, We're planning to upload a new version of librime, which has ABI/API breaks. The affected packages are few, and all under IME team's maintenance, and we're mostly ready to have sourceful upload for these packages: Source: fcitx-rime Source: ibus-rime Ben file: [...] Regards, Yixuan Hi, Could you please upload the new version of librime to experimental? This should automatically generate a simple tracker for your (called auto-librime). ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#753079: transition: librime
Hi, On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net wrote: On 2014-06-29 05:34, Guo Yixuan (郭溢譞) wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear Release Team, We're planning to upload a new version of librime, which has ABI/API breaks. The affected packages are few, and all under IME team's maintenance, and we're mostly ready to have sourceful upload for these packages: Source: fcitx-rime Source: ibus-rime Ben file: [...] Hi, Could you please upload the new version of librime to experimental? This should automatically generate a simple tracker for your (called auto-librime). ~Niels Osamu just helped to upload it (to unstable), so it's now in the new queue. [1] [1] https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/librime_1.1+dfsg-1.html Regards, Yixuan
Bug#753079: transition: librime
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear Release Team, We're planning to upload a new version of librime, which has ABI/API breaks. The affected packages are few, and all under IME team's maintenance, and we're mostly ready to have sourceful upload for these packages: Source: fcitx-rime Source: ibus-rime Ben file: title = librime; is_affected = .depends ~ librime0 | .depends ~ librime1; is_good = .depends ~ librime1; is_bad = .depends ~ librime0; Regards, Yixuan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
