On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Jiří Paleček wrote:Yes, but even then, libGL.so.1 (the one used for building a package) is only mentioned in one symbol file, namely the one from nvidia-glx, isn't it (let's put aside the package doesn't feature a symbol file)? Why should the libgl1-mesa-glx symbol file, if it existed, be taken into account?We could maybe help you if you told us to what part of the code you refer when you say that a single library can be mentioned in two different symbols files ? The code is what it is for many reasons including the fact that dpkg -S can return multiple packages for a single lib file. In practice, it
Exactly, that's the thing I'm referring to.
should almost never happen (except diversion) and the result when it happens is
Should I read it as "the only legal situation where it returns multiple packages are diversions (the rest are errors)" or "the majority of situations ... are diversions", ie. does it make sense to return multiple packages in the absence of diversions?
not specified (in the doc at least). In practice you might get a mix of both dependencies and to avoid any problem the packaging of the diverting library should simply stay compatible to the one of the official library (i.e. generate the same dependencies).
Yes, but I think this is unattainable. Especially when doing transitions, you're not likely to have both packages in sync.
I just wanted to know if it would be OK for dpkg-shlibdeps to use only one package for a library (eg. in case of diversions, use dpkg-divert to find the right one) and fail in case of ambiguity.
Regards
Jiri Palecek