Hi, Thanks for your answers. More questions below: Le 1 déc. 09 à 11:56, Paul Wise a écrit :
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Thibaut Paumard <mlotpot.news@free.fr> wrote:Out of curiosity and also to help a library's new upstream reach thearchive, I am learning about SONAME handling in Debian packages. I have read[1] but still could use direct advice. [1]Not sure what [1] is, but I guess you mean libpkg-guide?
Yes :-)
[...] The filename is derived from the SONAME. The package version is unrelated to the SONAME, some upstreams keep the SONAME and version number related.- Should the next SONAME be [...] libfooN.so.debian2 [...]libfooN.so.debian1. Since there was no debian1 SONAME yet, you can use that.[...]
Would the files then be: libfooN.so.debian1.0.0 with links libfooN.so.debian1 and libfooN.so?
- Even if the -dev package is currently named libfooN-dev, I guess it is better to use the SONAME in the next package: libfooN-SOVERS-dev, so thatthe few packages which currently Build-Depend on it don't FTBFS?The -dev package should not contain the SONAME, only the API number if any (N in this case). See #493951 for a Debian release manager's perspective on this issue.
Here, N is not the API number (it's just part of the library name). And the API did change with the new upstream between version 1.x.y and 1.X. Several packages will FTBFS if the -dev package name doesn't change. Only 4 packages build-depend on this package, but many more depend on these 4.
Although a little confusing, I would tend to introduce both an API number and an ABI number which, for the time being, match: debian1.
[...] Regards, Thibaut.