[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#669373: RFS: flactag/2.0.1-1 ITP #507876



Hi.
In article <[🔎] 4FAE801D.2010908@pocock.com.au>,
           Daniel Pocock<daniel@pocock.com.au> wrote:
> Does the -dev package need the ABI number in the name?

If it does, then there isn't an issue. The dev will me libmb4-3-dev.

>     libmusicbrainz-dev ->  /usr/include/musicbrainz/*.h    ?

That won't work really.

> Given that the ABI number will probably be bumped up to 5 anyway,

The ABI is currently 3. The '4' bit in it is the upstream version number.
The lib package should be called libmb4-3, not sure about the dev. If it we
call that libmb4-3-dev, then that also removes the clash.

> ABI number = 5
> SONAME = libmusicbrainz.so.5
> Package version = 4.1.x  or 5.0.x
>=> Package name = libmusicbrainz5 and libmusicbrainz5-dev
>
> and filenames:
>  libmusicbrainz5_4.1.0-1_amd64.deb
>  libmusicbrainz5-dev_4.1.0-1_amd64.deb
>
>
> (as described in my previous email on 1 May)

I'm not keen on this. If I update the ABI, I'm updating the upstream version
number too. It'll end up being libmusicbrainz5-4 if I do that. In this
instance, the '5' is *not* the ABI name, it's the upstream version number.

That's how the libmb packages have always been done before.

Andy


Reply to: