[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: shlibs on library packages

On Sun, 15 Dec 1996, Mr Stuart Lamble wrote:

lamble >
lamble >IMO, unless there are good reasons for doing things otherwise, the shlibs
lamble >file providing the dependancy information for the library should depend
lamble >upon something like:
lamble >
lamble >libfoo1 (>= 1.2.3-1)

Perhaps the dependency should only be on libfoo1 without qualification?
Or depend on 1.2.X-X ?

>From what I remember of the principles for sharable library it seesm to me
that the interface should be stable within a major version but new calls
can be added to it resulting in some danger of incompatibility.
The interface should certainly be stable  when the first two fields are constant.

I propose making library dependencies on the first two elements of the
version nubmer.

libfoo1 (>=1.2.0-0) (<<1.3.0-0)

The above is certainly a big problem. The same issue comes up when 
dpkg-shlibdeps builds dependencies on libc. When I want to add
a package to my old Debian 1.1 system I always have to upgrade the 
library unless I specify --force-depends. And I am hesitant to do anything
serious like upgrading the c library on some of our critical systems. I'd
rather risk the package failing than the whole system.

--- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ ---
PGP Public Key  =  FB 9B 31 21 04 1E 3A 33  C7 62 2F C0 CD 81 CA B5 

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com

Reply to: