Re: Transition needed for Octave 6.3.0?
* Sébastien Villemot <sebastien@debian.org> [2021-09-15 12:39]:
Instead of creating another separate shared library package for
liboctinterp, the idea would rather be to drop the liboctave package
and to turn the liboctave and liboctinterp shared libraries into
private ones, as is actually done by upstream (incidentally, we could
therefore the install_libraries_publically.patch that we have carried
over for a long time). Making those libraries private was also the
recommendation of a Release Team member.¹
Previously it was necessary to have these libraries installed in a
public location, because .oct files were linked against them (and dpkg-
shlibdeps would complain if they were kept private). But since Octave
5, .oct files no longer link against liboctave and liboctinterp.² So we
should now be able to make those libraries private.
I have verified on a specific Forge package (octave-struct) that it
works as expected.
The only exception is octave-nlopt, which explicitly links against
liboctave8 (because it does not use mkoctfile and rather has its own
build system). However I have a working patch that fixes the issue.
In parallel, if we go down that road, then I would suggest to rename
liboctave-dev to octave-dev (since there will no longer be a liboctave*
package). Of course, we would implement a transitional package for one
or two release cycles.
What do you think?
¹ https://lists.debian.org/debian-octave/2018/10/msg00001.html
² https://lists.debian.org/debian-octave/2019/10/msg00002.html
I agree with this plan. Thanks for proposing it.
Best,
Rafael Laboissière
Reply to: