openbox-dev contains incorrect symlinks making it's totally broken

I manually fixed the symlinks and all things start working. So, fixing this is simple. Just link the symlinks with correct files.

A similar issue occurs in the current Natty 11.04 package, opendev 3.4.11.2-0ubuntu1

This time the link is to libobrender.so.21.0.8 when the real file is libobrender.so.21.0.9

The relevant packaging files are debian/openbox-dev.links and debian/libob*.install

A fix to make them by in sync seems trivial; a fix to automatically ensure they *stay* in sync will be more work, but would be better, if it can reasonable be done. Investigating...

Fixed it the simple way (changing two characters in debian/openbox-dev.links and adding a changelog entry).

debdiff attatched.

The resulting package openbox-3.4.11.2-0ubuntu2 should be in my PPA soon for testing.

Thanks for the patch. I'll upload it ASAP.
A similar fix should also be made for maverick, but a SRU procedure is needed.

I think the original report was for Lucid. It was reported on 2010-08-07 which is before Maverick released.

In Maverick, I see no issue, everything uses 21.0.8 and so there are no dangling symlinks:

jonathan@maverick:~/packages/openbox$ dpkg-query -W openbox\*
openbox 3.4.11.1-1
openbox-dev 3.4.11.1-1
openbox-themes 1.0.2
jonathan@maverick:~/packages/openbox$ ls -l /usr/lib/libob*so*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 2011-03-15 22:34 /usr/lib/libobparser.so -> libobparser.so.21.0.8
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 2011-03-15 22:32 /usr/lib/libobparser.so.21 -> libobparser.so.21.0.8
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 18600 2010-05-15 02:28 /usr/lib/libobparser.so.21.0.8
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 2011-03-15 22:34 /usr/lib/libobrender.so -> libobrender.so.21.0.8
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 2011-03-15 22:32 /usr/lib/libobrender.so.21 -> libobrender.so.21.0.8
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 92776 2010-05-15 02:28 /usr/lib/libobrender.so.21.0.8
jonathan@maverick:~/packages/openbox$

So, unless I am misunderstanding this, there is no issue to fix in Maverick here :)

Lucid ( openbox-3.4.10-1 ) mixes up 21.0.2 and 21.0.6, as in the original report.

Therefore, I think Lucid is the release needing the SRU -- am I correct?

debdiff for Lucid attached.

Now I need to check all the requirements for SRU...

Updated bug description with info for SRU use.

Will wait for Natty fix to make it into Natty before nominating for Lucid and subscribing ubuntu-sru, to avoid the "It is, in general, not appropriate to release bug fixes for stable systems without first testing them in the current development branch." issue :)

This bug was fixed in the package openbox - 3.4.11.2-0ubuntu2

---------------
openbox (3.4.11.2-0ubuntu2) natty; urgency=low

  * debian/openbox-dev.links:
    - Update shared library version numbers to match debian/*.install
      (LP: #614696)
 -- Jonathan Marsden <email address hidden> Mon, 14 Mar 2011 22:04:05 -0700

Right, the similar fix was done on 3.4.11.1-1 version (In Maverick).

I uploaded the change for natty with 2 changes : typo in the name of the file changed (openpox-dev instead of open-dev), and the (LP: #614696) to close automaticly the bug on Launchpad.

Thanks for the SRU. Could you update the debdiff with :
- the (LP: #614696) in debian/changelog
- with 3.4.10-1ubuntu0.1 version which is more appropriate for a SRU.

new debdiff attached with: (LP:614696) and version 3.4.10-1ubuntu0.1

Incidentally, is there a wiki page or other document describing the SRU version numbering scheme using decimal values? That is a new idea to me.

Edited description (how addressed in development) to say that 3.4.11.2-0ubuntu2 is now included in Natty.

From https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates:

Upload the fixed package to release-proposed with the patch in the bug report, a detailed and user-readable changelog, and no other unrelated changes. Make sure that the version number does not conflict with any later and future version in other Ubuntu releases (the security policy document has a well-working scheme which can be used for SRUs.)

The security policy document is at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Update%20the%20packaging

Thanks Jonothan, uploaded to lucid-proposed with 2 changes :
- target lucid-proposed intead of lucid
- update the Maintainer field with "Ubuntu Developers <email address hidden>"

Is there anything we need to do further with this? It is now marked "Triaged", which seems odd.

I think we need to get the -proposed SRU fix verified?

Should this now be tagged "verification-needed" or whatever that tag is?

Having started fixing it, I'd like to see it all the way through, so if there is anything else I can usefully do for this bug, let me know.

We need to wait for the package to be accepted in lucid-proposed. It was only uploadded, waiting for approval. You will see the statut of this bug changed to "Fix commited" when it will be available.

APPROVED: the package version 3.4.10-1ubuntu0.1 from the lucid-proposed queue should be accepted.

Accepted openbox into lucid-proposed, the package will build now and be available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!

I've verified the package for Lucid, with the version of proposed the symlinks are indeed there, marking this as verification-done, thanks all.

This bug was fixed in the package openbox - 3.4.10-1ubuntu0.1

---------------
openbox (3.4.10-1ubuntu0.1) lucid-proposed; urgency=low

  * debian/openbox-dev.links:
    - Update shared library version numbers to match debian/*.install
      (LP: #614696).
 -- Jonathan Marsden <email address hidden> Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:30:48 -0700