Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#879886: libhts2: libhts2 needs to handle ABI changes
Hi Diane and everybody,
Le Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 05:09:34PM -0800, Diane Trout a écrit :
>
> I do think we should bring back the symbols file
I think so too.
Symbols file are strange to work with because their update usually goes
through a build failure that outputs a patch, which is not very
intuitive. And then the patched symbols file has to be edited to remove
the Debian minor version, otherwise it complicates backports etc.
Perhaps it can be simplified, better explained and streamlined. In any
case, I think that for the htslib it is worth the effort.
> I was wondering if we should split the cram headers into a
> libhts-private-dev so we can at least track what is depending on the
> non-public api.
An ideal solution, and I understand that it may not be easy, would be to
make the upstream users of htslib talk with the htslib developers, so
that they can implement what they want to without needing to access
private functions. I think that it would fit the aims of both sides.
> I did realize that my thought about updating the SOVERSION might be
> wrong because I was just looking in the source tree for the removed
> functions but I should have been checking the public header files.
Indeed, packages using private functions need to have a tight dependency
on the htslib (unless we are very confident that there are regression
tests that cover this area of the code). Packages that are more
well-behaved can infer their dependency through the (to be re-added)
symbols file.
Have a nice day,
Charles
--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: