On Aug 28, 2015 20:20, "Steve Langasek" <steve.langasek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 08:06:24PM -0300, Ricardo Salveti de Araujo wrote:
On Aug 21, 2015 14:17, "Tony Espy" <espy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 08/20/2015 05:20 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
I've been taking care of a backlog of packages that have been removed
in Debian but not removed in Ubuntu. One of the packages that's
shown
up on the list as having reverse-dependencies in Ubuntu is obexd,
whose
packages (obexd-client and obexd-server) don't merely have
reverse-dependencies, they have the ubuntu-touch metapackage as a
reverse-dependency.
According to the Debian bug report (http://bugs.debian.org/772094),
these packages are obsolete and superseded by bluez-obexd.
bluez-obexd
is available in Ubuntu, and does show itself as replacing
obexd-client
and obexd-server. Should the touch seed be changed to use
bluez-obexd
in place of obexd-{client,server} going forward from wily? Do we
have
test cases for obex support on the phone?
We do, the main use case here is contact sync with cars and so on, which
uses obex.
The API from the obex provided by bluez is quite different, so please
only
drop this once we migrate completely to bluez5.
Unfortunately, I already removed the packages when Tony gave the go-ahead.
Does this change need to be reverted? If so, I think it would be best if
the phone team explicitly took ownership of the obexd-* packages by
preparing a new upload (which could then be sponsored in).
Otherwise, as far as bluez5 is concerned, looking at the archive I believe
this migration is already done. So perhaps there's no need to revert?
I'm not following the bluez5 work, so not sure if it is already completed,
maybe Simon can provide more details.
