On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 10:54:13AM +0100, Stefanos Harhalakis wrote:
> I followed the CDBS conversion here:
> http://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/Implementation >
> which requests for debhelper >=8.1.3. I changed that to 9 now (no upload yet).
Right. It seems you've read it more carefully than I have :-)
I personally consider it a good idea to go check the debhelper manpage and see
what the current recommended compatibility level is, and to use that version
unless there are special reasons not to (such as compliance with freeze
policy). Of course, any such change means you have to check the resulting
packages diligently for regressions.
But that brings forth the question, why did you explicitly list
multiarch-support in the pre-depends line? Following those instructions, it
should automagically appear through misc:Pre-Depends.
And indeed, if I manually remove your explicit predependency on
multiarch-support, the pre-dependency remains.
> Which multiarch dependency did I miss?
Looks like you didn't. Sorry about that.
> > Have you tried building the packages that build-depend on libnet using your
> > updated package?
> Nope. Just using it locally for some time now without rebuilding anything
> against it.
I built them; only one fails. You may want to build arpon with your updated
package and see what causes the build failure and whether it's a bug in your
new package or a latent bug in arpon. (It doesn't FTBFS in sid.)
It's a good idea to test-build reverse build-dependencies whenever a library
package changes in any significant way.
> I suppose a push to experimental will help with that.
Unlikely, I think, unless you coordinate with the reverse build-dependency
maintainers. Experimental usage is always manual.