Le 2014-10-12 22:59, Gaudenz Steinlin a écrit :
Hi
Mehdi Dogguy <me...@dogguy.org> writes:
Control: reassign 764441 sinfo
Control: fixed 764441 0.0.47-2
Le 2014-10-11 23:58, Gaudenz Steinlin a écrit :
Hi
Mehdi Dogguy <me...@dogguy.org> writes:
Le 2014-10-09 22:55, Gaudenz Steinlin a écrit :
I will certainly update the Conflict if we can't agree on a better
solution in the next few days. But as the Conflict was a
workaround
from
the begining I'd prefer a solution where we agree on different
names
for
the commands instead.
I very much agree with what you say, but I think it is rather late
to
find
a stable name (where also upstream is confortable with) in time for
Jessie.
There are only a few days left before the freeze.
For that reason, I prefer to keep the old (and not so nice)
workaround
and
work on a better solution to implement in Jessie+1.
I've now uploaded a package with the conflict updated to
slurm-client.
Thanks. This is very much appreciated! (and marked as such) Besides,
please
note that you should still conflict with the old binary package name
to
support partial upgrades.
Just to be sure and to not have to do yet another upload. Adding a
conflict against slurm-llnl (<< 14.03.8-1) would be right, as
according
to the slurm-llnl changelog that's the version where the packages were
renamed.
IMHO, you can leave the conflicts statement on slurm-llnl unversioned
as
even the new one depends on slurm-client which brings sinfo. Otherwise,
yes,
14.03.8-1 is the correct version.
And wouldn't it be better to also add a conflict on the slurm-client
side? This would at least prevent a similar bug if the package get's
renamed again.
We can do that. I'll first wait until it migrates to testing and then
do
a second upload adding that.
Regards,
--
Mehdi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
