Re: ppl - source package should be versioned
Michael Tautschnig writes:
> > Michael Tautschnig writes:
> > > > Assume we do build the default gcc depending on a libppl0, now the
> > > > libppl soname is changed to libppl1, a new ppl source is uploaded, and
> > > > suddendly libppl0 isn't available anymore. And we still need to
> > > > rebuild gcc using gcc. Making the ppl source versioned (pplX), we
> > > > still have the old libppl0 in the archive, and can rebuild gcc, then
> > > > remove the old pplX source and binary packages only built from the old
> > > > source. Please consider this for the next version bump.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Does gcc indeed build-depend on libpplX/libppl-cX? If this is not the case, all
> > > that must be taken care of is transitions to testing, if I'm not mistaken. Or am
> > > I getting something wrong?
> >
> > yes. while you may have the old libppl0 still installed in the
> > system, a buildd cannot find it anymore in the archive, if it is not
> > installed anymore in the buildd chroot.
> >
>
> Sure, sorry for overlooking that point. What troubles me a bit is that I fail to
> find any package already doing that kind of stuff to find a bit of information
> on dos and don'ts. After all, gcc-snapshot depends on a quite large set of
> libraries, all of which should stumble over this issue at some point!? But
> apparently the only alternative seem to be version symbols and to build multiple
> versions of the library from a single package.
No, the driver (gcc) and the C compiler (cc1) only depend on gmp and
mpfr, which didn't change so versions yet. But yes, these packages
must be handled in the same way for a change of the soname.
Matthias
Reply to: