Re: How to version libraries
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 03:10:41PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > You should generate a source package based on the old library that
> > only does a libfoo1 binary package. You really ought to do this
> > whenever a you make a new binary library with a new soname. Yes it is
> > work, but it solves the upgrade problems. This is certainly true for
> > libraries that are actually released, and is somewhat less true for
> > libraries that were only in testing.
>
> We're talking about cases where version libfoo 1.5 has the same soname
> as libfoo 1.4, but the shlibs for 1.5 specifies "libfoo1 (>= 1.5-1)";
> then if this version is in sid and packages build against it, they
> will not be allowed into testing because libfoo1 is frozen at version
> 1.4.
How do you plan to resolve the case that the package has a build
dependency on libfoo1 (>= 1.5-1)? The package can't be built and the
source will be uncompiled in unstable?
The only real solution I see is to appeal to the maintainers of already
frozen libraries (you can't force them) to ponder whether they upload a
new library version to unstable or whether it's better to wait until the
end of the freeze.
BTW: Your plans imply that you allow only source-only uploads, or how
else do you want to avoid that a maintainer compiles his package
on an unstable system and makes it therefore uninstallable in
testing?
> Julian
cu
Adrian
--
A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a
"Yes" merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble.
-- Mahatma Ghandi
Reply to: