Bug#574572: lintian: false positives with shared libraries
Brian May <bam@debian.org> writes:
> Yes, have considered that myself. However, the SONAME doesn't change
> very frequently on these libraries. In fact I think some of these
> libraries the SONAME never have changed since I started maintaining
> them.
Yeah, that's not surprising. I'll be surprised if upstream ever changes
the SONAME of libkafs, for instance. I suspect you're best off just
adding overrides and only reconsidering if there's a good opportunity and
an SONAME change that you notice.
> Some libraries, e.g. libotp0 are very generic, but the argument could be
> made that Heimdal shouldn't really ship with it anyway as (AFAIK) it has
> nothing to do with Kerberos.
Well, insofar as Heimdal provides them and uses them, I wouldn't worry too
much about it. Having the library package name reflect the name of the
library is good because it draws attention to any potential conflict.
Having SONAMEs conflict but package names not is not actually a good
situation and one we should try to avoid if at all possible in Debian.
> Yes, this was major the reason I used the -heimdal prefix in the first
> place.
> Yes, the soname is different now, but this may not always be the case.
I believe the SONAME will always have to be different or all sorts of
things break horribly, starting with libkrb5-multidev and
heimdal-multidev. From recent upstream discussions with the MIT Kerberos
developers, I believe they're planning on ensuring that the SONAMEs will
always stay distinct.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: