>Since debian currently ships the binary libgdamm3.0-8 (probably, to avoid ABI >breakage by using a different binary package name)
No, they just changed the name to have it similar to the old 1.3 branch. They have not yet packaged the new version (where we have seen the ABI breakage). >ubuntu has libgdamm-3.0-8 and the new version has a different SONAME, no dummy >package > or conflicts/replaces are necessary at all. OK, but you still want to remove 3.0-8 don't you, and so for the transition to 3.0-9 you need a dummy package (and yes, you don't need conflicts/replaces). If we want to keep 3.0-8 (but why!?) then yes, I agree. -- Request: Upgrade libgdamm3.0 to upstream version 2.9.81 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/190744 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
