Re: libpkg-guide updated (versioned symbols), please proofread
> Sure, that's not an issue solved by versioned symbols. That's also not
> an issue that's solved by having extra Depends for -dev packages, or
> even one solved by including the SONAME in the -dev package name
> (at least, only so well as the SONAME matches the API but that's a
> bigger issue beyond just data structures and I mentioned it previously).
> I agree that people should be cautious, certainly.
I'll update the libpkg-guide with regards to that respect.
-dev packages may choose not to conflict, if there is enough
but there are implications
I hope the "Possible problem cases" section under
"Symbol Versioning for shared libraries"
in the libpkg-guide is clear on that point.
Is there anything missing?