Re: [DebianGIS] Re: gdal
On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 10:03 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Steve Halasz]
> > I've uploaded gdal 1.3.1 to mentors.debian.net (there was already a
> > 1.3.1-1 on alioth). I also committed the debian dir to alioth cvs. If
> > anyone wants to sponsor an upload to unstable that would be great.
>
> I had a look, planning to sponsor. Is the upstream source really
> containing the debian/ directory? I'm quite sure
> gdal-1.3.1.orig/DEBIAN/md5sums should not be part of the source. It
> is a generated file. What is the story with the debian/ and the
> DEBIAN/ directories?
I think DEBIAN/ should be removed. It appears debian/ is part of the
upstream. I'll request that it be excluded from gdal releases in the
future.
>
> > The soname bumped from 1.7.0 to 1.9.0. I don't think that requires any
> > specific changes. Is that correct?
>
> If the soname changes (or actually, if the ABI of the package
> changes), the library packages should change name as well, to keep
> existing installations and packages working when installing the new
> library package.
I'm having a heck of a time understanding
http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html
It seems to use SONAME to just refer to the first number. And the given
snippet:
$ objdump -p libgdal.so.1.9.0 | sed -n
-e's/^[[:space:]]*SONAME[[:space:]]*//p' | sed -e's/\([0-9]\)\.so
\./\1-/; s/\.so\.//'
yields:
libgdal1
>From reading the libtool docs 1.7.0 -> 1.9.0 means the source code was
changed. 1.7.0 -> 2.0.0 would mean the interface had changed. I'd think
in the latter case that we would go to libgdal2. But I have no
experience with this or real understanding of what changes the ABI. If
we do need to change, do we call it libgdal1.9? libgdal2?
Steve
Reply to: