FWD: C++ library packaging
----- Forwarded message from Nathan Myers <ncm@cantrip.org> -----
From: Nathan Myers <ncm@cantrip.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 22:35:20 +0000
To: joeyh@debian.org
Subject: C++ library packaging
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests= version=2.20
Hi Joey,
I'm (re-)packaging some C++ libraries.
Unfortunately the original packager failed to incorporate
dependence on the compiler/libstdc++ version in the name, so
that equal versions of the library, but built with different
compiler versions, cannot coexist.
This is a general problem with C++ libraries (getting less so
as the compiler and library maintainers slouch toward a fixed
ABI), but is not mentioned in the policy manual. I'm guessing
we should incorporate the gcc-version in the package name,
like libxerces-gcc3.1_1.7.0-1.deb. The .so files, I suppose,
would have to look like lib/libxerces-gcc3.1.so.1.7.0.
I don't know how many C++ library packages there are in Debian
now, but they all need this treatment.
Of more fundamental concern, the name for libstdc++ will have
to change, because libstdc++ from gcc-3.1 is not upward-binary-
compatible with the one from 3.0.x, so (IIUC) we can't have a
libstdc++.so.3.1. Fortunately, they have finally committed to
binary compatibility for all gcc-3.1.x, but will soon release an
incompatible gcc-3.2. (Probably all gcc-4.x.x will be at least
upward-binary-compatible.)
I've been out of the loop for some time. Has there been any
discussion of this?
Nathan Myers
ncm@cantrip.org
p.s. You are welcome to pass on any of the above to the appropriate list.
----- End forwarded message -----
--
see shy jo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: