Re: library-related policy question

[Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>]

On Sun, Sep  6, 2009 at 12:50:59 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:

> Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > Is there an statement in Debian Policy that explicitly requires higher 
> > version of a shared library package to be backwards-binary-compatible with 
> > previous versions of the same package?
> > 
> > I mean, is a situation when after library package upgrade local binaries 
> > stops working because of missing symbols, by definition an RC bug against 
> > library package? Or is depends on particular situation?
> 
> Yes, it's an RC bug. If you break the API and/or ABI, you need to change the
> package name and the SONAME.
> 
AFAIK the rule is "if you break ABI, you MUST change the package name and
SHOULD change the SONAME".

Policy already has "The run-time shared library needs to be placed in a
package whose name changes whenever the shared object version changes"
(with the assumption that the SONAME changes when ABI breaks) in section
8.1.

Cheers,
Julien