-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
after upload sane-backends 1.0.27-1 I close this bug.
CU
Jörg
- --
New:
GPG Fingerprint: 63E0 075F C8D4 3ABB 35AB 30EE 09F8 9F3C 8CA1 D25D
GPG key (long) : 09F89F3C8CA1D25D
GPG Key: 8CA1D25D
CAcert Key S/N : 0E:D4:56
Old pgp Key:
On 11/02/2017 10:40 AM, Alex ARNAUD wrote:
If we expect to make Debian and GNU/Linux universal we have to keep
that people don't want to buy a new hardware to switch from Windows
or Mac to GNU/Linux.
The regular user should be the target, not the hacker. Sane 1.0.27 should
work as 1.0.25 for the
Le 01/11/2017 à 21:30, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz a écrit :
It should be the responsibility of the end user to make sure to buy
hardware from a Linux-friendly manufacturer who is willing to update
their drivers accordingly.
Do you really want that Debian keeps down it's drive to improve quality
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 7:49 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
> On 11/02/2017 12:18 AM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> Again, changing library package names due to SO bumps happen all
> the time. I don't see why the libsane package should be any different
> from other
On 11/02/2017 12:18 AM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> I don't want to drag this out, since in my opinion this issue is
> resolved with comment 57. But I think it's worth noting:
> 1) There was no soname bump here. My understanding of Debian Policy
> and the Lintian warning is that it does not require
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:30 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
> On 11/01/2017 09:19 PM, Gunter Königsmann wrote:
>> When dealing with 3rd-party products any change in upstream sane or
>> debian might cause breaks, though.
>
> And? As I said, this happens all the
On 11/01/2017 09:19 PM, Gunter Königsmann wrote:
> When dealing with 3rd-party products any change in upstream sane or
> debian might cause breaks, though.
And? As I said, this happens all the time. Seriously.
You are phrasing this as if renaming library packages due to
an SO bump is an
> As I said, library transitions happen all the time. Debian's
responsibility
> lies within the limits of the Debian archive. We can not and we also don't
> want to be responsible for any *binary* packages outside the Debian
archive.
Debian cannot fix the rest of the world in case that it breaks
Hello Rolf!
There are obviously some misconceptions on the Ubuntu side, especially
among its users what exactly has happened here and why it happened.
First of all, it's not Debian's responsibility if Ubuntu as their downstream
pulls a package from the *experimental* distribution without making
On 11/01/2017 08:21 PM, Rolf Bensch wrote:
> This isn't a good idea, because I'm building the ppa from SANE's daily
> git snapshots.
>
> If you decided to rename libsane to libsane1 generally, I can change the
> name in my ppa.
Can you please take your Ubuntu discussions out of Debian.
This
Am 01.11.2017 um 20:10 schrieb Jeremy Bicha:
> Just copy the proposed update libsane-backends
> 1.0.27-1~experimental2ubuntu2.1 to your PPA.
This isn't a good idea, because I'm building the ppa from SANE's daily
git snapshots.
If you decided to rename libsane to libsane1 generally, I can change
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Rolf Bensch wrote:
> FYI, this also beaks my Ubuntu PPA
Just copy the proposed update libsane-backends
1.0.27-1~experimental2ubuntu2.1 to your PPA.
Thanks,
Jeremy Bicha
Hi All,
Why have you renamed libsane to libsane1? Debian provides more effective
mechanisms for versioning a package than renaming it.
FYI, this also beaks my Ubuntu PPA
(https://launchpad.net/~rolfbensch/+archive/ubuntu/sane-git), which I'm
providing as an Ubuntu using SANE maintainer.
Hope
Hi Jeremy!
On 10/25/2017 05:10 AM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> Ok, with help from infinity and RAOF, this solution appears to work.
> You can keep the libsane1 package name and you don't have to add a
> transitional package.
Thanks a lot, we will incorporate that.
>
> infinity strongly recommended
Control: tags -1 +patch
Ok, with help from infinity and RAOF, this solution appears to work. You
can keep the libsane1 package name and you don't have to add a transitional
package.
infinity strongly recommended the Conflicts instead of Breaks for this
situation.
On 22.10.2017 18:41, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> >> I am adding Provides: libsane to Ubuntu's libsane1 and I strongly
> >> encourage you to make this
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
>> I am adding Provides: libsane to Ubuntu's libsane1 and I strongly
>> encourage you to make this change in Debian also.
>
> Oops, the Provides
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> I am adding Provides: libsane to Ubuntu's libsane1 and I strongly
> encourage you to make this change in Debian also.
Oops, the Provides didn't work. I'm guessing because the dependency is
versioned.
I don't see any
I am reopening this bug because I think the original reporter's
suggestion was right. The fact that he runs Ubuntu doesn't matter for
the bug that was reported.
Please see the Impact and Test Case I added to the description of
https://launchpad.net/bugs/1707352
I am adding Provides: libsane to
Hello Gunter,
the version 1.0.27-1~experimental1ubuntu2 is a Ubuntu specific version.
They based on the Debian 1.0.27-1~experimental1 from the branch
experimental.
Quote from[1]:
Experimental is used for packages which are still being developed, and
with a high risk of breaking your system.
Package: libsane1
Version: 1.0.27-1~experimental1ubuntu2
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
There are wishlist bugs already about individual packages no more
working after switching from libsane1 to libsane but I think the
situation is more grave than that: All 3rd-party scanner drivers that
21 matches
Mail list logo