Bug#708248: transition: json-c
I have verified that libjson0 with just symlinks works (running
psensor), and building with libjson0-dev ends with libjson-c2 as
dependency (upstart).
Thus I am ready to upload the package to unstable.
Ondrej
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Ondřej Surý <ondrej@sury.org> wrote:
> Good question. I guess I got stuck in the upstream way of 'compatibility'.
>
> That's the best solution. I'll prepare the packages in experimental and we'll see.
>
> Ondřej Surý
>
> On 16. 5. 2013, at 12:03, Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:25:32 +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Steve,
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
>>>> Hi Ondřej,
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 03:12:02PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
>>>>> JSON-C upstream has renamed the library from libjson.so to
>>>>> libjson-c.so, headers are now in /usr/include/json-c and pkg-config is
>>>>> called json-c.
>>>>
>>>>> There's a compatibility layer (symlinks and libjson.so.0), but since
>>>>> the library has so few r-deps, I feel that we might not need it to
>>>>> make things more simple in the future. The upstream is planning to
>>>>> drop the compatibility layer in next release anyway, so we would have
>>>>> to do the transition in some other point in time.
>>>>
>>>> Not necessarily. If the ABI has not changed, there is no reason that we
>>>> should not keep the compatibility layer in place in Debian *indefinitely*.
>>>>
>>>> For another example of this, see libcurl3-gnutls.
>>>
>>> There are some new symbols in libjson-c library and _no_ symbols in libjson
>> Why isn't libjson.so.0 a symlink to libjson-c.so.2 then?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Julien
--
Ondřej Surý <ondrej@sury.org>
Reply to: