Re: Bug#950760: RFS: libbpf/0.0.6-1 -- eBPF helper library (development files)

["Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>]

On 2020-02-06 08:12, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 06-02-2020 00:07, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 22:42 +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 10:22 PM Christian Barcenas
> > > <christian@cbarcenas.com> wrote:
> > > > Because this changes the versioning scheme from kernel releases
> > > > (libbpf-dev and libbpf0 currently are at 5.4.13-1 in sid) to libbpf
> > > > version numbers (0.0.6-1), the epoch needs to be incremented to 1 I
> > > > believe.
> > >
> > > I had this doubt but 5.4.13-1 is the linux source version, and
> > > libbpf0 has the version of 0.0.5. And since there is no separate
> > > source for libbpf so will this not be  considered as a new package
> > > rather than a version change?
> >
> > No. There is currently a libbpf0 binary package. After the source
> > package split, there will still be a libbpf0 binary package. The
> > version of that binary package cannot go backwards.
> >
> > (The source package will indeed be NEW, but that's not the issue under
> > discussion here.)
>
> But, if I am correct, the source could be using a version without epoch
> and only use the epoch in the binary package (which can be dropped if
> libbpf0 is ever replaced by libbpf1).

Yes. It's a little more work on the packaging side, but entirely 
possible to do it that way.

Regards,

Adam