[Pkg-silc-devel] Please binNMU pidgin against libsilc-dev (>= 1.1.9-1)

[Cyril Brulebois]

Luk Claes <luk at debian.org> (11/07/2009):
> Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > From silc-toolkit_1.1.9-1/changelog:
> > |    * libsilc and libsilcclient are now shipped in two different binary packages
> > |      in order to respect their SONAMEs.  The -dev package depends on both and
> > |      has been renamed to libsilc-dev.
> > 
> > libpurple0 (from src:pidgin) depends on one of them. I guess a rebuild
> > would update that dependency; given that silc_client_* symbols come from
> > the libsilcclient-1.1.3 binary, a dependency against that one is going
> > to be added.
> 
> The strange thing is that the soname of libsilc did not change, though
> as there are only a small number of reverse dependencies, I've
> scheduled binNMUs for them.

Since I was porting it to GNU/kFreeBSD, I didn't notice the following
problem until now:
 - pidgin B-D on libsilc-1.1-2-dev | libsilc-dev.
 - silc-toolkit dropped the former for the latter.
 - sbuild picks the former (which still exists in the archive since it
   wasn't trashed). [and didn't exist on the system I was working on,
   that's why I didn't notice at once.]
 - sbuild can't install it since it depends on an old version of the
   library.

I see two ways here:
 - decruft the old -dev;
 - tweak the B-D on pidgin's side (Ari Cc'd for that matter)… but there
   are other packages in this case.

silc-toolkit folks may want to contact their reverse dependencies to
sort this mess out, I guess.

Mraw,
KiBi.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-silc-devel/attachments/20090711/59a27ad3/attachment.pgp>