On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:27:20PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> 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.
Again, you should not be renaming the libjson0 package to libjson-c2. The
binary package name should *only* change when there is a
backwards-incompatible ABI change, which there isn't here as long as
libjson.so.0 is provided as a symlink. So this should be a *non*
transition.
Having newly-built packages end up with an ELF dependency on libjson-c.so.2
is fine - but the binary package name should remain libjson0.
--
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
> 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>
>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature