Re: libffm adoption/change of soname
Adam C Powell IV <hazelsct@debian.org> writes:
> On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 13:19 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Adam C Powell IV <hazelsct@debian.org> writes:
>>
>> > Greetings,
>> >
>> > I'm adopting libffm, and noticed that it has the erroneous soname of
>> > libffm.so.0. Since the library interface has changed on just about
>> > every upgrade, it should really be libffm.so.0.28.
>> >
>> > On the other hand, the interface has only changed once since it was made
>> > a Debian package, so libffm.so.1 sort of makes sense. But this is
>> > incompatible with upstream's name.
>> >
>> > So I'd like to leave the package name as libffm1(-dev), but change the
>> > soname. Packages won't need to change dependencies, but binaries built
>> > against it will need to relink since libffm.so.0 will no longer exist.
>> > As far as I know, the only package affected is illuminator, which I
>> > maintain (hence my adoption, as it was headed for the trash bin).
>> >
>> > Any comments/objections?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > -Adam
>>
>> Why not rename the package and soname to libffm0.28(-dev) so they make
>> sense and match up again?
>
> You know, that makes sense. If I'm going to change the soname, so
> packages have to be rebuilt anyway, I really should change the package
> name with it (policy may even require it). (That should have been
> obvious to me...)
>
> Since it's not likely that people will want to install multiple versions
> of the -dev package, I'll just make that libffm-dev.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Adam
Don't forget to change the name on every _API_ change. Sounds like the
lib is till highly under developement so I wouldn't be surprised if
the API changes slightly with releases as well.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: