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

Re: library transition from libpisync0 to libpisync1

On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 03:48:03PM +0100, Ludovic Rousseau wrote:
> Philipp Kern a écrit :
>> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 02:55:15PM +0100, Ludovic Rousseau wrote:
>>> I also filed bug #458728 asking a rebuild of evolution and bug #458729 
>>> asking a rebuild of gnome-pilot.

>> You conclude in the bug reports that the API has not changed, which is
>> fine and that the ABI probably has not changed too.  Well, then a SONAME
>> bump is wrong, if that is the case.

> I think it is an error from upstream.
> I don't think it would have been a good idea to revert the patch from 
> upstream and keep the SONAME just to simplify Debian dependencies.

No, but you could keep the same package name to ease upgrades, bump the
shlibs, and provide a backwards-compatible symlink for libpisync.so.0 ->

C.f. <http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2007/12/msg00269.html>,
<http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2007/12/msg00060.html> for
discussion of the similar problem in boost.

I confirm that there are no symbols added or removed between libpisync0 and
libpisync1.  I haven't checked that their arguments are unchanged, but if
they are, I really would recommend rolling back the package name and
providing this sort of compatibility shim, maintaining compatibility both
with third-party binaries and with pre-existing Debian binary packages.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Reply to: