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

Re: About dpkg-shlibdeps checks



On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:39:58AM +0000, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> as announced in
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/09/msg00004.html the
> new dpkg-shlibdeps is stricter in what it accepts and will fail when it
> can't find dependency information for a library that is used by an
> executable or a public library (a public library is defined as a library
> which has a SONAME, see the output of "objdump -p").
> 
> Failures look like this:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: No dependency information found for libkdeinit4_kfmclient.so (used by debian/konqueror/usr/bin/kfmclient).
> 
> It might also look like this:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: couldn't find library libhpip.so.0 (note: only packages with 'shlibs' files are looked into).
> 
> I believe this change is good because it makes sure we don't upload
> packages lacking some important dependency information (see the bug
> #10807 for a simple example...). 
> 
> But it sure breaks quite a few packages who have "private" libraries with
> a SONAME. I'm willing to add meaningful exceptions to the rule and I just
> implemented two of them (not yet committed, so it's not in 1.14.10
> recently uploaded):
> - when the library is in the same package than the binary analyzed
> - when the library is not versionned and can't have a shlibs file
> 
> I think those ought to be enough to avoid many build-failures. In all other
> cases, I believe the right way to fix the failures is to add "shlibs"
> informations even if they are only used between multiple binary packages
> of the same source package. It means that dh_makeshlibs needs to be called
> before dh_shlibdeps of course.
> 
> If you know of other good exceptions, please tell me.

  does your plan include having a version of the dpkg-shlibdeps that
works in "warning-mode" only so that we can have a more extensive idea
of how the things are going to be, before it stops the development of
the biggest and already hardest packages to maintain out there ?

  I mean warning that a new dpkg-shlibdeps is in town is a thing, but
having clues _before_ the storm on how bad the storm will be would be of
help. It's too early to break _everything_ in Debian. Please consider
that plan.

-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpnGYQDDhsNt.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: