Re: libphysfs 1.0.1

[Barry deFreese <bdefreese@debian.org>]

Barry deFreese wrote:
> Barry deFreese wrote:
> > Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > > TO ALL REVERSE DEPENDENCIES OF libphysfs: please don't recompile/upload
> > > against libphysfs-1.0-1 until the issue mentioned below is figured out.
> > > We will let you know.
> > >
> > > * Barry deFreese [Tue, 03 Mar 2009 12:00:34 -0500]:
> > >
> > >  
> > > > Barry deFreese wrote:
> > > >   
> > > > > Hi folks,
> > > > >       
> > >
> > > Hello, Barry!
> > >
> > >  
> > > > It appears that all of the packages are fine with libphysfs-1.0.1 
> > > > so I  have uploaded it to unstable.
> > > >     
> > >
> > > Two comments. First, I'm not sure if you're aware that waiting for an
> > > ACK from the release team before uploading soname bumping packages is
> > > preferred. If you're aware and you thought it was okay, well, okay. ;-)
> > >
> > >   
> > No, I wasn't when we are just after a release so my apologies there.
> >
> > > Second, and more importantly, I actually see no reason for the SONAME
> > > bump! Meaning, that as far as I can see, the list of symbols between
> > > libphysfs-1.0.so.1 and libphysfs-1.0.so.0 is identical. Do you know if
> > > there has been some other ABI change that does not entail symbols, and
> > > which would make the bump needed? If not, we'll need to talk about
> > > reverting it. It'd be great if you could check.
> > >
> > >   
> > I don't think there is.  What I think actually happened was that the 
> > previous version actually had the wrong package name.  Does it really 
> > require a reversion?  1.1.1 may suffer from the same issues. (Meaning 
> > it has another soname change upstream but I think the symbols are 
> > identical, but I need to verify that.).
> >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > >   
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Barry deFreese
> Well it appears that I was wrong about part of it.  1.0.0 isn't 
> complaining about the package name, even though I think it probably 
> should.  1.0.1 Does seem to be ABI compatible and is NOT a soname 
> bump.  I'm attaching objdump -T output from 1.0.0 and 1.0.1 just in 
> case I missed something.
>
> 1.1.1 does appear to have some significant changes so that might be a 
> bigger issue but I think I goofed on the 1.0.1 upload and there should 
> be no issues.
>
> Sorry,
>
> Barry deFreese
Sorry I should have clarified.  libphysfs-1.0.0 SONAME is 
libphysfs-1.0.so.0 and libphysfs-1.0.1 is libphysfs-1.0.so.1. (Thanks to 
Julien for pointing that out).

Thanks,

Barry deFreese