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

Re: libopenobex library transition

Am Donnerstag, 23. März 2006 06:36 schrieb Steve Langasek:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 04:55:39PM +0100, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > Sadly, they changed the soname again. So instead of directly uploading
> > the new upstream version, I would like to wait for the following bugs to
> > be resolved,
> > first:
> > affix: #358279
> > kdebluetooth: #358275
> > multisync: #358283
> > obexftp: needs upload of 0.19 (have to ask my sponsor :)
> First of all, why are there already two libopenobex packages in unstable
> (libopenobex -> libopenobex1, and libopenobex1.0 -> libopenobex1.0-0)?
> Secondly, why do the above bugs need to be fixed before uploading the new
> version of libopenobex?  AIUI, they already build-depend only on
> libopenobex-1.0-0-dev, which is the older version of the library.


> Third, if you're changing the name of the -dev package anyway, why are you
> changing it to libopenobex1-dev instead of libopenobex-dev?  Is the API
> expected to change with every soname change?

No but I cannot say that it will never change in an incompatible way (be it 
renaming of structs, functions, the whole glue or how the library can be 
I followed libpkg-guide here:

Additionally, libopenobex-1.0-0-dev already has a
Provides: libopenobex-dev
which makes this impossible (could stay installed in this case).

> > When those are in testing, I will request removal of the old binary lib
> > packages (libopenobex-1.0-0*) from testing and sid.
> Well, that answers my first question.  It also means that those bugs are
> filed at the wrong severity: these packages currently do *not* FTBFS,
> because you haven't requested removal of the old library yet.

BTW: do they get removed automatically after some time or do I have to request 
that? What about the source packages?

> > The build dependencies of those packages should then be at
> > libopenobex-dev (>= 1.1)
> That won't work.  libopenobex-dev is a virtual package; you can't have a
> versioned (build-)dep on a virtual package.

Ui, didn't know that. Then it must follow every soname manually...

> But I don't see any good reason why libopenobex-dev shouldn't be the *real*
> package name.
> So, please:
> - make the name of the -dev package libopenobex-dev instead of
>   libopenobex1-dev, because sonames shouldn't be encoded in -dev package
>   names

libpkg-guide says the opposite.

> - don't wait for the other packages to be updated before uploading the new
>   soname, if one is needed
> - don't wait for the other packages to be updated before filing a removal
>   request for the old library version.

Where do I request such a removal?


Reply to: