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

Re: libpkg-guide updated (versioned symbols), please proofread

On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 07:08:03PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Steve Langasek (vorlon@debian.org) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 04:52:35PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > -dev packages should *NOT* depend on other -dev packages unless their
> > > public .h files #include files from those other -dev packages (which
> > > generally shouldn't be the case).  That whole crap was due to the lack
> > > of understanding of the problem and blindness to the proper solution
> > > (versioned symbols).  The result is that it just makes things FTBFS and
> > > doesn't actually fix the problem anyway.  Not exactly useful.

> > The reason for dependencies between -dev packages was libtool's failure
> > to accomodate glibc's transitive dependency support, which is a separate
> > issue than versioned symbols (though both contribute to the overall 
> > problem).

> Hmmm, my understanding was that it was a foolish attempt to make it
> impossible to compile a binary which depended on multiple versions
> (through other libraries) of a library.  Of course, this doesn't
> actually work in practice because libraries change after the binary has
> been compiled.

No, it has to do with people not liking it when their packages FTBFS due
to random missing dependencies of one of their build-depends.

> In fact, double-checking, this is, in fact, what the 'Debian Library
> Packaging Guide' (I swear I'm gonna choke and die on that sometime
> soon) purports to do under Chapter 6. -DEV package dependencies.  At
> least, I assume that is what's meant by:

> " This will ensure that only the -dev packages compatible with the
> libraries linked with the library will be installed, and such
> conflicting relations can be expressed in the -dev packages. Lacking
> such depends will cause problems like binaries being linked to libpng2
> and libpng3 at the same time."

> If I'm misunderstanding that, please let me know. :)

<shrug> looks like a bug to me, though it may accurately describe a goal
of some library maintainers.  But this is another practice that will be
superseded once versioned symbols are in common use.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: