Re: [Pkg-osg-devel] [Alberto Luaces] Re: About to upload 3.2.0~rc1
"Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" writes: > 2013/7/30 Alberto Luaces : >>> So that's it, I'm building (and if succesfull, upload) this version, >>> after the long delay. >> >> Ooops! I haven't had any time to say that 3.2.0 just had been released >> last week. I promise to have it ready this week :) > > It built fine and I uploaded it a few hours ago, because I don't know > if I would be able to devote enough time in the next few days/weeks > (continuous time to perform all the necessary steps, that is) and > didn't want to delay it longer. > Ok. My only concern is that lintian said for 3.2.0~rc1 that this name is a greater version number than 3.2.0, so I don't know if we are going to have problems later. I think I remeber we could add a "+" sign un order to overcome this issue, but I'm not sure. > > Now it needs to pass the NEW queue because of the new binary package > names anyway, which will take a while, and the names will be preserved > between this RC and the final version. It has virtually no changes > with the final 3.2.0 so everything should be fine. > > I submitted bug reports for the 6 packages build-depending on openscenegraph. > Thanks! > > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=pkg-osg-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org > > Due to the change in osg::Geometry, all these seem to fail compiling. Of > these: > > - flightgear, simgear and fgrun are part of the same basic package and > with the same maintainer group, and seem a bit abandoned. > > - openwalnut don't know > > - choreonoid seems to have an active maintainer and very recent uploads > > - osgearth is quite outdated and I read in some list that it has > license incompatibility problems (openssl and others), so it might as > well be removed > > > I tried to patch them by replacing osg::Geometry with > deprecated_osg::Geometry but doesn't seem to work out of the box in > the cases that I tried (there are additional errors), which are about > 4 out of the 6. But some of them are already FTBFS due to other > problems, like missing -lpthread, and not fixed for months, missing > from testing in some cases. > Oh, sorry! I already suggested doing so for the openwalnut bug, I need to rectify that. Anyway, if it is not working, I will have to tell upstream that deprecated_osg is not working as it should. > > So let's keep an eye on them. > > In the future, we might want to get track of this situation with > library transitions (or provide multiple versions of the library at > the same time), but since the number of packages are low and not > widely used, and not very well maintained in some cases (it's likely > that some of the maintainers will not pay attention to the transition > anyway), and involves quite a lot of bureaucracy, I didn't think that > it was necessary in this case -- if we get told off because of this, > it's my fault. > Is it not enough for them to stick with an older version of the library? As long as someone is using them, they should not be removed from the archive, am I right? -- Alberto ___ Pkg-osg-devel mailing list Pkg-osg-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-osg-devel
Re: [Pkg-osg-devel] [Alberto Luaces] Re: About to upload 3.2.0~rc1
2013/7/30 Alberto Luaces : >> So that's it, I'm building (and if succesfull, upload) this version, >> after the long delay. > > Ooops! I haven't had any time to say that 3.2.0 just had been released > last week. I promise to have it ready this week :) It built fine and I uploaded it a few hours ago, because I don't know if I would be able to devote enough time in the next few days/weeks (continuous time to perform all the necessary steps, that is) and didn't want to delay it longer. Now it needs to pass the NEW queue because of the new binary package names anyway, which will take a while, and the names will be preserved between this RC and the final version. It has virtually no changes with the final 3.2.0 so everything should be fine. I submitted bug reports for the 6 packages build-depending on openscenegraph. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=pkg-osg-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org Due to the change in osg::Geometry, all these seem to fail compiling. Of these: - flightgear, simgear and fgrun are part of the same basic package and with the same maintainer group, and seem a bit abandoned. - openwalnut don't know - choreonoid seems to have an active maintainer and very recent uploads - osgearth is quite outdated and I read in some list that it has license incompatibility problems (openssl and others), so it might as well be removed I tried to patch them by replacing osg::Geometry with deprecated_osg::Geometry but doesn't seem to work out of the box in the cases that I tried (there are additional errors), which are about 4 out of the 6. But some of them are already FTBFS due to other problems, like missing -lpthread, and not fixed for months, missing from testing in some cases. So let's keep an eye on them. In the future, we might want to get track of this situation with library transitions (or provide multiple versions of the library at the same time), but since the number of packages are low and not widely used, and not very well maintained in some cases (it's likely that some of the maintainers will not pay attention to the transition anyway), and involves quite a lot of bureaucracy, I didn't think that it was necessary in this case -- if we get told off because of this, it's my fault. Cheers. ___ Pkg-osg-devel mailing list Pkg-osg-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-osg-devel
[Pkg-osg-devel] [Alberto Luaces] Re: About to upload 3.2.0~rc1
[Re-sending with the correct mail address] --- Begin Message --- Hello! "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" writes: > Hello, > > So that's it, I'm building (and if succesfull, upload) this version, > after the long delay. > Ooops! I haven't had any time to say that 3.2.0 just had been released last week. I promise to have it ready this week :) > > (Remember that, since this is a new upstream version and I created the > .orig.tar.* myself, you will have to download it from Debian and > overwrite yours, otherwise it will cause problem for the next > revisions -- md5sums of .orig.tar.* will not match, most likely). > Ok. > > We should really make this repository git-buildpackage compatible. > Maybe it's possible using some options? But there are better ways > IMO, using git-impor-dscs to import all recent .dscs (or indeed, all > .dscs available in snapshot.debian.org), and include the .orig.tar.* > in the pristine-tar branch. > I have to start looking about that; for sure it looks useful. -- Alberto --- End Message --- ___ Pkg-osg-devel mailing list Pkg-osg-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-osg-devel
