On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 13:12 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > > > > "I heard from archlinux" is not good enough. I sent you email about > > this without getting a reply, then filed #1006920, without getting a > > reply, now this incomplete proposal. you may want to look at all the > > build rdeps for libtbb2-dev in Ubuntu to get an overview what at least > > breaks:
Sorry for the late response but I think that's what usually happens when the maintainer is occupied by research and studies. I would not have submitted this incomplete transition slot if I did not hear so much request. I think the solution for allowing the co-existence of tbb and onetbb is not the best. Because tbb will not have upstream support in the future due to deprecation. > > > this breaks everything immediately because of the conflicting libtbb2 > > and libtbb12. Please fix this first. > > Can you please respond to these remarks? They raise valid points for us. libtbb2 and libtbb12 contains some common files hence the conflict. I'd rather wait for all the reverse deps to be ready for this transition, compared to going through NEW again due to binary package change. I've started rebuilding the reverse dependencies and filing bugs, will get back to you soon.
