On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:18:23PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > > BTW, having Build-Depends: libfoo-dev in
> > > a library's build-deps, will allow the developer
> > > to overlook a soname change in depending shared library.
> > > Which is a bad idea in the QA standpoint.
> > Yes and no.
> > The programer can overlook the soname change for the source. The API
> > hasn't changed and nothing needs to adjust for the new soname.
> > The packaging system won't let the binary forget the soname change
> > though as that is part of the package name of the libary. Binaries
> > will keep using the old lib till they are recompiled.
> I'm talking about the following case:
> 1. libA depends on libB1, but only build-depends on libB-dev
> 2. libB1 changes to be libB2.
> 3. libA is rebuilt with libB2 without maintainer noticing (could happen
> on buildd, etc.), possibly creating a noncompatible interface.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's the part that needs to be fixed.
> It would be a practical case especially when libB1, libB2 are not
> using versioned symbols.
Except that libB *should* be using versioned symbols, for all libB where
there exists a libA that depends on it.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature