Please ignore the mail below, I think I understand that part now.
libavdevice53 itself depends on libavcodec5{3|4} depending on where it
comes from.
Paul
On 21-03-13 08:04, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi Andrey,
>
> On 21-03-13 07:46, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:17:50PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
>>>> Maybe I've picked the wrong example, the actual problem was with
>>>> libavdevice53, the same soname is used for either 0.8.5-1 and 9.3-1,
>>>> but 9.3-1 links to libavcodec54 while 0.8.5-1 links to libavcodec53, so
>>>> my binary ended up importing either libavcodec53 and libavcodec54 when
>>>> both were installed and did not work.
>>> If this is true, and I must say I may have had the same experience,
>>> isn't this hinting at a bug in libavdevice53, not being stable enough to
>>> keep the same SONAME? I think you should file a bug against libavdevice53.
>> Why? The problem is caused by indirect dependency on both libavcodec53 and
>> libavcodec54, not by ABI breakage.
>
> Could you please explain what the problem is then becasue I don't see it
> (I really want to learn here). As I understand it, if you get
> libavdevice53 in a newer version it should still work with stuff that
> was build against an older version, right? If it breaks, the soname
> should be updated and the packagename changed, so that the libraries can
> be co-installed. So I guess you see the problem elsewhere?
>
> Paul
>
>
>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature