Re: Dependencies on shared libs, take 2
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 04:47:07PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>> > Throwing a sensible error at build-time if the soname has changed
>> > without a package name change is also something that needs to be done,
>> > as well as throwing an error at build-time if symbols listed in the
>> > symbols file have gone missing;
>> Lintian already does the first,
> That's not a build-time error.
Only because lintian is not part of the build chain. As I said before,
enforcing the use of lintian would give you build time errors.
>> and a new check could be added for the second. There should be no need to
>> complicate Raphaël's proposal when there is already a tool specifically
>> designed for tests of this sort.
> Yes, there is: the symbol information that needs to be stored is identical
> for both and should be shared for the two tasks.
I don't understand this. As I see it, the test can be performed in a later
stage along with several other tests. Why special case this one, or worse,
duplicate the test?
If I read my books correctly, each unit should do only one task (when