Re: [FWD] Re: [Jackit-devel] parallel installs to die
|--==> Junichi Uekawa writes:
JU> Can you wait until etch release please ? This will mean binaries
JU> compiled on sid will have a different SONAME requirements, so will no
JU> longer work on etch. Right ?
>>
>>No they will still work, as the SONAME is unchanged with respect to
>>the jack version in etch, it's still 0.0.23.
JU> Hmm?
JU> $ objdump -p /usr/lib/libjack.so |grep SON
JU> SONAME libjack-0.100.0.so.0
Oh that's true, sorry, I was mislead by the fact that:
$ ls -l /usr/lib/libjack.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 25 Jan 18 12:16 /usr/lib/libjack.so -> libjack-0.100.0.so.0.0.23
but I forgot that the current libjack package in actually forces the
change in the soname, even if the new version and the old are actually
binary compatible, but of course the linker doesn't know that :/
>>Why that? The libjack-dev package is currently a virtual package
>>(which at the moment is only provided by libjack0.100.0-dev) , and in
>>any case a package should better depend on it rather that on
>>libjack0.100.0-dev, unless there are specific reasons to do it.
>>
>>So I think that bug report should be done in any case, to prevent
>>having to change build-dependencies if libjack0.100.0-dev gets
>>updated, say to libjack0.102.20-dev.
JU> When the -dev name is going to be bumped, we'll have to have a
JU> coordinated transition; with potentially manual testing. It doesn't
JU> have to happen now. We're going to have to do that anyway when
JU> something changes in jack side.
Yes it has worked that way till now, but that jack upstream developers
are now going to change the soname in case of backward binary
incompatibility, so we don't need anymore to include the version
number in the -dev package, and change all the build dependencies
accordingly.
Ciao,
Free
Reply to: