Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Hi Julien, On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 08:36:01PM +0200, Julien Yann Dutheil wrote: > bpp-phyl-omics pushed (once more had committed and forgotten to push, sorry > about that). It was building without any problem for me. I've just added the symbols file (please be more verbose in your changelogs

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Dear Andreas, bpp-phyl-omics pushed (once more had committed and forgotten to push, sorry about that). Best, Julien. On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Julien, > > On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 08:32:26AM +0200, Julien Yann Dutheil wrote: > > Continuing to

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Hi Julien, On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 08:32:26AM +0200, Julien Yann Dutheil wrote: > Continuing to upload new versions, but keep getting messages like this one > when running debuild: > devlibs error: There is no package matching [libbpp-core-dev] > > Updating my packages + setting dhlibs > 0.82 in

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Hi Continuing to upload new versions, but keep getting messages like this one when running debuild: devlibs error: There is no package matching [libbpp-core-dev] Updating my packages + setting dhlibs > 0.82 in rules solved the issue for some packages, but I keep facing it in libbpp-phyl-omics,

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

This was actually a fresh clone... yet everything looks in order https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/libbpp-seq/branches ... is it safe to move forward? J. On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > Looks strange. May be you create a fresh clone and try again? >

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Looks strange. May be you create a fresh clone and try again? On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 08:51:11PM +0200, Julien Yann Dutheil wrote: > Dear Andreas, > > I moved forward with libbpp-seq, but after pushing I got the following > message: > > remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (172/172), completed with

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Dear Andreas, I moved forward with libbpp-seq, but after pushing I got the following message: remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (172/172), completed with 152 local objects. remote: remote: To create a merge request for pristine-tar, visit: remote:

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Hi Andreas, On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:17 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Julien, > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 09:26:01PM +0100, Julien Yann Dutheil wrote: > > I could somehow udate the symbols list, but still get a lintian warning > > [1]. > > That was just a typo (see commit

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Hi Julien, On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 09:26:01PM +0100, Julien Yann Dutheil wrote: > I could somehow udate the symbols list, but still get a lintian warning > [1]. That was just a typo (see commit 06beb6872bb0c773aff727c25dfe0777a7c401ca). > I have pushed my commits, would you mind giving them a

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Dear Andreas, I could somehow udate the symbols list, but still get a lintian warning [1]. I have pushed my commits, would you mind giving them a look? Will proceed with other libs once I have confirmation that everything is ok. Best, Julien. [1]

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Hi Julien, On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 05:25:10PM +0100, Julien Yann Dutheil wrote: > I'm starting to package libbpp-core4 from upstream. It works fine but I > have a warning because of the symbol files which are not matching. My > understanding is that this is due to your previous (unreleased) patch

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Dear Andreas, I'm starting to package libbpp-core4 from upstream. It works fine but I have a warning because of the symbol files which are not matching. My understanding is that this is due to your previous (unreleased) patch which was incrementing the interface number for version 2.3.2. How can

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Hi Julien, On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 09:19:51AM +0100, Julien Yann Dutheil wrote: > I am almost done! As we were to change the soname, I took the chance to fix > another gcc7 issue, that is to remove all dynamic exception specifications > in all libraries. Got interupted by some travelling, but I

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Hi Andreas, I am almost done! As we were to change the soname, I took the chance to fix another gcc7 issue, that is to remove all dynamic exception specifications in all libraries. Got interupted by some travelling, but I plan to finish this by the end of this week. Sorry again for the delay,

Bug#890400: Any news about a new upstream version with new SONAME?

Hi Julien, I wonder whether you've found a solution upstream or whether it might be better to upload my proposed soname bump inside the Debian package. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de