Control: forcemerge 796925 797618 Control: tags 796925 + patch On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 at 23:16:35 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > Source: opencolorio > Version: 1.0.9~dfsg0-3
Sorry, I didn't spot the existing bug for this. Merging them. However, there was some useful information in my bug report which wasn't in #796925, which is why I'm quoting it here: > A patch is available in Ubuntu, > <http://patches.ubuntu.com/o/opencolorio/opencolorio_1.0.9~dfsg0-3ubuntu2.patch>. > > These follow-up transitions for libstdc++ are not going through exactly > the normal transition procedure, because many entangled transitions are > going on at the same time, and the usual ordered transition procedure > does not scale that far. When all the C++ libraries on which this library > depends have started their transitions in unstable if required, this > library should do the same, closing this bug; the release team will deal > with binNMUs as needed. > In the case of opencolorio: The dependency analysis I did in #797618 was for the wrong source package. Sorry about that, let's try that again: * there is a circular build-dep with openimageio which will need some care (Ubuntu temporarily disabled openimageio support in opencolorio, which seems a reasonable solution) * boost, tinyxml and yaml-cpp0.3 already started their transitions * Qt does not need a rename * I think the rest are C or Python and so do not need renames so the conclusion is the same: I think these two packages are ready to go. > The package is likely to be NMU'd in the near future if there is no > maintainer response, with a patch very similar to the one in Ubuntu. The > release team have declared a 2 day NMU delay[2] for packages involved > in the libstdc++ transition, in order to get unstable back to a usable > state in a finite time. Still true. > [1] https://wiki.debian.org/GCC5#libstdc.2B-.2B-_ABI_transition > [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2015/08/msg00000.html
