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

Bug#610653: ITP: dmtcp -- Checkpoint/Restart functionality for Linux processes



On Wed, 02 Feb 2011, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> > Okay, so I have fixed this one as well. Here is the link to the latest
> > .dsc file:
> > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dmtcp/dmtcp_1.2.0+svn873-1.dsc
> ok -- I will have a look

almost there!! could have uploaded as is with a promise to have them
fixed later but decided to ask to fix first :

* dmtcp_checkpoint
  started to pollute output with numbers:

    $> dmtcp_checkpoint -q ls -l /dev/null 
    crw-rw-rw- 1 root root 1, 3 Jan 27 08:58 /dev/null
    2916
    I 2916


    and there is much more of them while running something like screen

* $> objdump -p /usr/lib/dmtcp/libdmtcpaware.so.1.0.0 | grep SONAME
  SONAME               libdmtcpaware.so.1.0.0
  
    SONAME is an identified of ABI compatibility... so now, even though you would
    release libdmtcpaware.so.1.0.1 or libdmtcpaware.so.1.1.0 SONAME should
    remain the same, thus different from actual version... usually only the
    'major' version is included in SONAME, i.e. for god sake of convenience it
    should be been libdmtcpaware.so.1   or, if you foresee often breakage of ABI,
    libdmtcpaware.so.1.0 (ie major.minor) at most

    Also version part of SONAME (i.e. SOVERSION) should usually match version
    in package name, which is libdmtcpaware1 ;-)

    It is all there:
    http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html#sonameapiabi

* Would you mind adding

  * Upload sponsored by Yaroslav Halchenko <debian@onerussian.com>

  to the debian/changelog entry, so others could see whom to blame if something
  is yet not up to par with package ;-)


And then it should all be golden and ready to go

-- 
=------------------------------------------------------------------=
Keep in touch                                     www.onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko                 www.ohloh.net/accounts/yarikoptic



Reply to: