Re: libgtop2 NMU and advice asked.
On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 10:10:33AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 08:53:47AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I am currently preparing a NMU for libgtop2, which is broken and whose
> > maintainer told me has no time to fix right now.
> > Now, the problem was that the libgtop library moved from 0.so.0.0.1 to
> > 0.so.1.0.1, and the install rules didn't catch this changes.
> > Now, if i understood this change right, it is because the major so
> > version did change from 0 to 1, right?
> Afaict, yes it looks like the soname changed from libgtop-2.0.so.0 to
> libgtop-2.0.so.1. Use 'objdump -p' to be sure.
Yep, this is what happened. A rebuild of dependant packages was enough,
altough the libgtop2 package is buggy, it builds using the installed
versions of the libraries and not the currently building.
(libgtop2-common and such still were linked against the 2.0.so.0
libgtop2). I don't think i will be able to fix this quickly, and since
the current makefile build libgtop2 after the other libraries, i think
the upstream build system is a bit messy or something.
> > This means that all apps using it need to be rebuilt with the new
> > version, right? Are there any particularities i need to be aware of
> > when doing this, and how will i notify package which need to be
> > rebuilt?
> (If my guess above was correct) The change in the soname reflects a
> binary incompatible change, you'll have to do the usual package
> renaming (libgtop-2.0-1, libgtop-2.0-1-dev) and submit bugreports with
> request for rebuilding.
:((( I was afraid of that. Should i be doind this ? I have not had
experience with shared libs and soname stuff, and i am not the
maintainer of this package. I just wanted this fixed because i use and
package gnome applet using this.
> However, before you do anything like this, you should check that
> binary compatibilty was indeed broken and that the soname change was
Mmm, how do i check that ? Notice that hardware-applet got broken at
least 3 times and needed to be rebuild, i didn't fully discover which
package was involved all those times, it could have been libgtop2 all
> > (Currently reading the Policy document, but it doesn't say much about
> > this, is there another reference document speaking about shared lib
> > soname ?)
Should this not be linked officially ?
> cu and- please take this with a _big_ grain of salt, I am by no
> means what you'd call an authority for libtool or even library
> packaging -reas
I understand, thanks anyway.