Re: upstream library without a SONAME
> That is a nice, rational versioning scheme, I agree.
> I don't see how it fits in this discussion, though. For one thing,
> I'm not using libtool.
But all shared libraries are recommended to follow this convention.
> So I guess I'm still searching for the answer to my original questions:
> 1. Does Debian require a SONAME for a shared lib?
You mean the tag inside the library itself?
All of the shared libraries I have installed on my machine have an
embedded SONAME tag. I thought this was required by the dynamic linker?
> 2a. If so, what to do about upstream packages that don't supply one?
> 2b. If not, what the heck does the discussion on package naming in
> policy section 11.3 mean?
The discussion in 11.3 is just making sure that the packaging will allow
multiple versions of the shared library to be installed at the same time.
If a new version comes out which is not backwards compatible with the
old, you need to be able to install both versions at the same time.
If your package is named libfoo, you can't do that. That's why it
needs to be named libfoo2 or whatever, so that you can install
libfoo3 without needing to remove libfoo2.