Steve Langasek wrote:
But if I do introduce SONAME to the Debian version, what version should it have? The only sensible answer that I can think of is "0", as any other answer is sure to conflict with the upstream choice, should they come to their senses in the future. I don't see the major difference between saying "SONAME" version 0 and not giving SONAME at all, but I don't mind it so much either.I have still not totally given up on convincing him, though, so I'll be in touch.... :-)It's not acceptable to install a shared library without an SONAME for two reasons: - if the library's ABI changes and the filename doesn't change, the new library package will have to conflict with the old package, forcing removal of all other packages using the old version of the library - if at a later date upstream comes to their senses and starts using an SONAME for their shared library, the *-dev* package will still have to conflict with the old library package for the same reason, forcing removal of packages depending on it
Another thing that comes up is an incompatibility between the deb currently provided by the site (as well as binaries compiled with libargtable compiled from source) and the deb we would provide. Binaries compiled with the former two will depend on "libargtable2.so", while binaries compiled with the later will depend on "libargtable2.so.0". I can fix it by including the symlink from libargtable2.so to libargtable2.so.0 in the non-dev package, I think. Will it work?Introducing an SONAME to a library in Debian when it doesn't have one upstream isn't great, but the only sensible alternative is to not ship it as a shared library at all.
Shachar
--
Shachar Shemesh
Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd.
Have you backed up today's work? http://www.lingnu.com/backup.html