Hi KDE folks-- I've recently uploaded gpgme1.0 1.17.1 to debian experimental. I put it in experimental because libqgpgme changed SONAME from 7 to 15, indicating an ABI break. As of 1.17.1-3, it appears to build on all release architectures.
I think the only packages that need to be rebuilt against this soname
bump are part of KDE:
0 dkg@alice:~$ apt rdepends libqgpgme7
libqgpgme7
Reverse Depends:
Depends: libgpgmepp-dev (= 1.16.0-1.2)
Depends: libqgpgme7-dbgsym (= 1.16.0-1.2)
Depends: libkf5mailcommon5abi2 (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: libkf5libkleo5 (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: accountwizard (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: kmail (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: kleopatra (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: kget (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: libkf5mimetreeparser5abi1 (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: libkf5messageviewer5abi1 (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: libkf5messagecore5abi1 (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: libkf5messagecomposer5abi1 (>= 1.16.0)
Depends: kdepim-addons (>= 1.16.0)
0 dkg@alice:~$
How would you like to proceed with this? One approach would be to do a
no-changes upload to experimental for the source packages for those
packages listed above, letting the buildd network do the rebuilds,
pushing DEP-14 branches ("debian/experimental") to salsa to keep track
of what's changed.
Then, when they all are seen to build cleanly (and test?) then we could
ask for a binNMU for these packages as part of a transition.
I don't have the bandwidth to join the qt-kde team generally, and i
don't have access to push branches to any qt-kde-team repo on salsa; and
i'm reluctant to step on any toes, so i would prefer to have the KDE
team either do it or give me guidance on what workflow is best for that
team.
I think the following 8 source packages will need a rebuild:
kdepim-addons
kf5-messagelib
kget
kleopatra
kmail
kmail-account-wizard
libkf5libkleo
libkf5mailcommon
Let me know what you think is a good plan here,
--dkg
(PS i believe this is the upstream conversation about the ABI breakage:
https://dev.gnupg.org/T5834)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
