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

Re: gcc 3.2 transition in unstable

On 2003-01-06 12:26:17 -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 04:56:58PM +0000, Eduardo Pérez Ureta wrote:
> > I'm also opposed to this form of transition like other Debian developers.
> > I would like to see all the sonames changed.
> Then IMHO you should request upstream library maintainers to bump their
> sonames whenever API/ABI breaks. That is the root cause of the problem.

Of course I want upstream library maintainers to bump their sonames whenever
API/ABI breaks.
What I'm proposing is that if upstream doesn't want to change sonames whenever 
API/ABI breaks, Debian package should do it, even if that breaks
compatibility with other distros.

> [snip]
> > But, I will support the transition if the Debian project officially states
> > that this is the last API/ABI transition without changing the sonames.
> > And the next other API/ABI change in KDE or other C++ program or even C
> > program MUST change the sonames even if other distributions don't change the
> > sonames when changing the API/ABI.
> [snip]
> IMHO, this is shooting the patient to cure the disease. The real problem
> is that upstream fails to bump the sonames whenever the API/ABI changes. 
> This is not a problem with Debian, it's a problem with upstream. Making
> Debian bump the sonames ourselves may cure the symptoms but doesn't cure
> the upstream problem, and only introduces more problems (incompatibility
> with other distros). Our current way of handling this within Debian may be
> messy, but this problem is inherently messy until upstream adopts a sane
> soname policy.

Of course this is not a problem with Debian.

Debian shouldn't include incompatible ABI/API changes without changing sonames.
If upstream doesn't want to change sonames Debian should do. We shouldn't
break locally compiled packages or non Debian software.

Changing sonames in Debian if upstream doesn't change them would make
Debian binaries incompatible with RedHat ones.
But, What is worse?
Making Debian 3.0 incompatible with RedHat 8.0 or making Debian 3.0
incompatible with Debian 3.1?

Reply to: