Re: [DebianGIS] gdal package names?
On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 09:34:08AM -0500, Steve Halasz wrote:
> I committed the name change in CVS. The -1 refers to the SONAME rather
> than the debian version. So the first upload would be
> libgdal1.3.1-1_1.3.1-1, the second libgdal1.3.1-1_1.3.1-2 and so on.
> This is based on the library packaging guide which says:
>
> "To distinguish the package name and the SONAME version number, for
> library packages with a name ending in a numeric, the form
> lib[libraryname]-[SONAME version number] is preferred."
>
> Although the library name doesn't really end in a numeric I was trying
> to go for something as close to accepted policy as possible.
>
> The policy manual states that the package name must change. This is to
> force all depending packages to rebuild for the new ABI. Am I wrong
> here? Is there another way to make this happen and conform to policy?
>
> I'm not in favor of changing the SONAME ourselves since it would be
> inconsistent with the actual SONAME which will hopefully be updated
> correctly in the future.
>
> Also I've asked about this on the mentors list and somebody said they
> thought, given the situation, that putting the version number in the
> package name "seems ok":
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2005/12/msg00282.html
>
On the basis of Steve and Silke comments, it seems reasonable for
me using something like
libgdal1-1.3.1
libgdal1-1.3.1-dev
the reason is that the soname is already present in the first part.
Repeating that is perfectly superfluos. I think honestly that the minor
version could be also neglected and added again just in case it would
be useful later. So
libgdal1-1.3
libgdal1-1.3-dev
could suffices.
The reason for having the versioned -dev package
is managing possible C++ API changes consistentl (else libgdal1-dev
would be ok). Using a simple counter instead of the version after
the soname number could also be possible, but I would hope upstream
will change the soname whenever the C++ interface stabilized, and
we should get finally a libgal2 that day!
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
Reply to: