I am CCing upstream here. Dear Conrad,
Was an shlib bump warranted, based on your view of http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=651997 ? Thanks. Kumar On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:35:53AM +0100, Johannes Ring wrote: > [Adding Kumar (maintainer of Armadillo) in Cc] > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Julien Cristau > <julien.cris...@logilab.fr> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:46:46 +0100, Johannes Ring wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Andreas Kloeckner <inf...@tiker.net> > >> wrote: > >> > This being as it is, could you upload a new package with tightened > >> > dependencies? > >> > >> The dependency on libarmadillo2 is added automatically by > >> ${shlibs:Depends}. I guess I could add a version requirement for > >> libarmadillo-dev in Build-Depends, but DOLFIN does not depend on a > >> specific version of Armadillo, so I don't see why I should. You had > >> this problem because you were using an old libarmadillo2 (version > >> 1:2.2.5+dfsg-1) from testing while you using DOLFIN (version 1.0.0-1) > >> from unstable, which was built against a newer libarmadillo2 package > >> from unstable. I guess this is a problem you will see from time to > >> time when mixing packages from testing and unstable. > >> > > No, it absolutely isn't. If libarmadillo2 exports new symbols then it > > has to bump the version in its shlibs declaration. If it didn't do > > that, this is a serious bug in that package. > > Yes, you are absolutely right. What I wrote above wasn't thought through. > > Johannes -- Kumar Appaiah -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
