Re: libphysfs 1.0.1

[Barry deFreese <bdefreese@debian.org>]

Adeodato Simó wrote:
> TO ALL REVERSE DEPENDENCIES OF libphysfs: please don't recompile/upload
> against libphysfs-1.0-1 until the issue mentioned below is figured out.
> We will let you know.
>
> * Barry deFreese [Tue, 03 Mar 2009 12:00:34 -0500]:
>
>   
> > Barry deFreese wrote:
> >     
> > > Hi folks,
> > >       
>
> Hello, Barry!
>
>   
> > It appears that all of the packages are fine with libphysfs-1.0.1 so I  
> > have uploaded it to unstable.
> >     
>
> Two comments. First, I'm not sure if you're aware that waiting for an
> ACK from the release team before uploading soname bumping packages is
> preferred. If you're aware and you thought it was okay, well, okay. ;-)
>
>   
No, I wasn't when we are just after a release so my apologies there.

> Second, and more importantly, I actually see no reason for the SONAME
> bump! Meaning, that as far as I can see, the list of symbols between
> libphysfs-1.0.so.1 and libphysfs-1.0.so.0 is identical. Do you know if
> there has been some other ABI change that does not entail symbols, and
> which would make the bump needed? If not, we'll need to talk about
> reverting it. It'd be great if you could check.
>
>   
I don't think there is.  What I think actually happened was that the 
previous version actually had the wrong package name.  Does it really 
require a reversion?  1.1.1 may suffer from the same issues. (Meaning it 
has another soname change upstream but I think the symbols are 
identical, but I need to verify that.).

> Cheers,
>
>   

Thanks,

Barry deFreese