On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 05:33:22PM +0000, Alberto Garcia wrote: > On Sun, Feb 04, 2024 at 11:05:46PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > In fact, none of the t64 binaries currently being uploaded > > to experimental have the final ABI either, we're just using > > experimental to clear binary NEW. > I was having a look at two of the packages that I maintain that have > t64 binaries in experimental and I noticed that while the binary > package does have a different name the .so files themselves are the > same. Is this expected when we're talking about an ABI break? Yes. There is longstanding precedent for this in Debian when doing toolchain-driven ABI transitions where the upstream soname of the library does not change (c102, c2, c2a, ldbl, v5...). It is also an important part of ensuring this transition is NOT disruptive on architectures where there is no ABI change (all 64-bit architectures + i386). -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature