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

Re: RFC: SDL and X static extension libraries re-revisited

On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 07:57:57AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Now every time your libraries' interface changes, sdl's soname will need
> to be bumped.  Worse yet, unless sdl's maintainer actively tracks this,
> it will not be done and we will end up with broken binaries.

But SDL already has to do this anyway.  If libXxf86dga's interface
changes, static or shared, it will probably break SDL.

The difference is, with a static libXxf86dga (et al.), no *applications*
will break when this happens.  All applications, plugins, and libraries
based on libSDL will have a shlibdep on it anyway.  If/when libSDL changes the
way it deals with the static X extension libraries, it probably *should*
bump its soname.

libsdl1.2 Depends: xlibs (>= whatever)
xlibs-pic Depends: xlibs (= whatever)

Therefore, there will always be synchrony between SDL's soname and
whatever version of the X extension libs it uses.  Everything that is
SDL dependent will have shlibdeps on the proper version of SDL.

It might also be a good idea, though, for libsdl1.2-dev to Conflict:
xlibs-pic (<< whatever).  Note the less-than relation.  This will ensure
that all packages that need to statically link in the extension libs
link in the right version.

Of course, the versioning in "whatever" needs to be watched carefully by

> IOW, if you want to solve the dlopen problem, make proper shlibs.

That's not my decision to make.

G. Branden Robinson                |
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     Music is the brandy of the damned.
branden@debian.org                 |     -- George Bernard Shaw
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgpVgYcn9n0Hm.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: