On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:53:03PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 11:13:08 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 03:33:42PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > Hi Bill, > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 18:08:21 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > > > > > Dear release team, > > > > > > > > I would like to proceed with the libjpeg8 transition. What are your > > > > plan ? > > > > > > > #547393 is marked as blocked by a number of other bugs. Can you check > > > with the maintainers of the affected packages? > > > > I could, but consider that: > > #592925 is fixed, #582417 is not really a bug and the others seems to have > > unresponsive maintainers, it looks like a loss of time. > > They'll still need to be fixed when we make the switch, since some of > them are libraries with a non-trivial number of reverse dependencies. > Of course one option could be to make them build-depend on > libjpeg62-dev, but if the maintainers are unresponsive you should be > prepared to NMU.
One issue with this transition is that a number of packages still depends on libjpeg62-dev instead of libjpeg-dev. This might cause packages to have uninstallable build-dependency until they are fixed. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
