Re: library-related policy question
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