On 08/31/2015 09:27 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > I commited a fix for the library transition to SVN. (Besides this > I also tried to fix some lintian issues but failed with the > wrong-whatis-entry-in-manpage one.) > > Olivier, could you please check and either upload or ping me for > team upload? hi, I gonna upload. I was waiting for further info as GCC5 transition was not clear to me (why renaming to v5, were there other modifications needed....).
Olivier > > Kind regards > > Andreas, > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 08:25:22PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: >> Source: cassiopee >> Version: 1.0.3+dfsg-2 >> Severity: serious >> Tags: sid stretch >> User: debian-...@lists.debian.org >> Usertags: libstdc++-cxx11 >> >> Hi, >> >> your library exposes std::string or std::list in its public API, and >> therefore the library package needs to be renamed. >> >> Specifically the use of std::list in TreeNode, CassieIndexer and >> CassieSearch is likely to break ABI. >> >> Cheers, >> Julien >> >> The following is a form letter: >> >> Background [1]: libstdc++6 introduces a new ABI to conform to the >> C++11 standard, but keeps the old ABI to not break existing binaries. >> Packages which are built with g++-5 are using the new ABI. Libraries built >> from this source package export some of the new __cxx11 or B5cxx11 symbols, >> and >> dropping other symbols. If these symbols are part of the API of the library, >> then this rebuild with g++-5 will trigger a transition for the library. >> >> What is needed: >> >> - Rebuild the library using g++/g++-5. Note that most likely all C++ >> libraries within the build dependencies need a rebuild too. You can >> find the log for a rebuild in >> https://people.debian.org/~doko/logs/gcc5-20150813/ >> Search for "BEGIN GCC CXX11" in the log. >> >> - Decide if the symbols matching __cxx11 or B5cxx11 are part of the >> library API, and are used by the reverse dependencies of the >> library. >> >> - If there are no symbols matching __cxx11 or B5cxx11 in the symbols >> forming the library API, you should close this issue with a short >> explanation. >> >> - If there are no reverse dependencies, it should be the package >> maintainers decision if a transition is needed. However this might >> break software which is not in the Debian archive, and built >> against these packages. >> >> - If a library transition is needed, please prepare for the change. >> Rename the library package, append "v5" to the name of the package >> (e.g. libfoo2 -> libfoo2v5). Such a change can be avoided, if you >> have a soversion bump and you upload this version instead of the >> renamed package. Prepare a patch and attach it to this issue (mark >> this issue with patch), so that it is possible to NMU such a >> package. We'll probably have more than hundred transitions >> triggered. Then reassign the issue to release.debian.org and >> properly tag it as a transition issue, by sending an email to >> cont...@bugs.debian.org: >> >> user release.debian....@packages.debian.org >> usertag <this issue> + transition >> block <this issue> by 790756 >> reassign <this issue> release.debian.org >> >> - If unsure if a transition is needed, please tag the issue with help >> to ask for feedback from other Debian developers. >> >> The libstdc++6 transition will be a large one, and it will come with a >> lot of pain. Please help it by preparing the follow-up transitions. >> >> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/GCC5#libstdc.2B-.2B-_ABI_transition >> > > >> _______________________________________________ >> Debian-med-packaging mailing list >> debian-med-packag...@lists.alioth.debian.org >> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-med-packaging > > > -- > gpg key id: 4096R/326D8438 (keyring.debian.org) > Key fingerprint = 5FB4 6F83 D3B9 5204 6335 D26D 78DC 68DB 326D 8438
