Bug#700759: Shared library policy on private libs

[Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Guillem" == Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> writes:

    Guillem> On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 20:30:48 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
    >> with the current packaging tools, you tend to end up producing
    >> the .shlibs files in order to manage cross-package dependencies
    >> within a single source package.  If it were relatively easy to
    >> convince the packaging tools to handle dependencies within a
    >> source package and to omit including the shlibs file in the
    >> binary, I'd buy that as a requirement too.

    Guillem> You mean something like debian/shlibs.local or
    Guillem> dpkg-shlibdeps -L?

Wrong side.
I'm talking about interfaces like dh_makeshlibs  not having an option to
output into a local shlibs file
or to easily say which packages should have symbols/shlibs files get
installed.

Also, there doesn't seem to be local support for symbols files.
That may not be a huge deal, but the layer above dpkg-source not making
this easy is.