Ryan Tandy <r...@nardis.ca> writes: > One possible alternative is renaming the package without actually > bumping SONAME; for example libhdb9a. Then you get to re-sync with > upstream at the next increment.
The obvious way to do this would be to remove the stupid -heimdal postfix from these package names (it seemed like a good idea at the time...). Should I limit this to just the two libraries with known problems, or all the Heimdal libraries? However, unfortunately, that would mean the new packages conflict with the old packages, which is undesirable. Maybe the lesser evil however??? >>I am not particularly keen on maintaining a growing set of patches that >>maintain backward compatability for eternanity while deliberately >>breaking compatability with other non-Debian-distributions however. > > I think following upstream on this one is the right thing to do. I don't > want to create extra work for you, but I do think we should handle this > breakage somehow since we know it can happen. If that's best achieved by > a change on the openldap side, I'm of course open to that too. Yes, I much prefer following upstream. Means binaries are more likely to work across distributions. I only hope that upstream have finished breaking ABI compatability... -- Brian May <b...@debian.org>
