2:28 p.m.
Hi!
We have no dep-checker script (yet) that's running regularly for RPM
Fusion. Thus: If you update a package which contains libs (like for
example the recently updated x264 package) which have a higher .soname
than before then *pretty please* mail the list and tell us about so
things can be fixed quickly. Even better: also send mails to all the
maintainers that take care of packages that depend on the old library.
Otherwise things might be broken for a few days and users will run into
trouble -- we should do our best to avoid that. I'd say that should be
way easier then in Fedora because we are a way small group of people.
CU
knurd
12:57 p.m.
On Monday, 08 September 2008 at 16:28, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Hi!
We have no dep-checker script (yet) that's running regularly for RPM
Fusion. Thus: If you update a package which contains libs (like for
example the recently updated x264 package) which have a higher .soname
than before then *pretty please* mail the list and tell us about so
things can be fixed quickly. Even better: also send mails to all the
maintainers that take care of packages that depend on the old library.
Otherwise things might be broken for a few days and users will run into
trouble -- we should do our best to avoid that. I'd say that should be
way easier then in Fedora because we are a way small group of people.
Sorry, I only asked on IRC. My bad.
Regards,
R.
--
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
Livna http://rpm.livna.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
4:34 p.m.
New subject: Please let others know if you build a update that ships with a bumped .soname
On 09.09.2008 14:57, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Monday, 08 September 2008 at 16:28, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> We have no dep-checker script (yet) that's running regularly for RPM
> Fusion. Thus: If you update a package which contains libs (like for
> example the recently updated x264 package) which have a higher .soname
> than before then *pretty please* mail the list and tell us about so
> things can be fixed quickly. Even better: also send mails to all the
> maintainers that take care of packages that depend on the old library.
> Otherwise things might be broken for a few days and users will run into
> trouble -- we should do our best to avoid that. I'd say that should be
> way easier then in Fedora because we are a way small group of people.
Sorry, I only asked on IRC.
Yeah, IRC really is dangerous ;-)
My bad.
np. But while at it: I was really unsatisfied with the update process
around faad2 and ffmpeg in Livna. We for example once had a newer faad2
and newer ffmpeg in livna-testing, and even after weeks just few of the
packages that depended on those two had been rebuild. We also had quite
long (more then two weeks for some packages iirc) breakage periods in
the devel branch after we built and pushed new faad2 or ffmpeg packages
there.
We IMHO should try to avoid similar situations in the future. But I
don't know how. "Working together more closely" might just do the trick.
Cu
knurd
5713
days inactive
5714
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski -
Thorsten Leemhuis