[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Bug#863030: Do not encode soversion in source and dev package name
From: |
Michael Biebl |
Subject: |
Bug#863030: Do not encode soversion in source and dev package name |
Date: |
Mon, 17 Jul 2017 11:56:45 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 |
Am 17.07.2017 um 08:48 schrieb Simon Josefsson:
> Hi Michael. I don't agree with renaming the package name. The debian
> policy manual says in section 8.1 [1] that:
>
> The run-time shared library must be placed in a package whose
> name changes whenever the SONAME of the shared
> library changes. This allows several versions of the shared
> library to be installed at the same time, allowing installation
> of the new version of the shared library without immediately
> breaking binaries that depend on the old version. Normally,
> the run-time shared library and its SONAME symlink should be
> placed in a package named librarynamesoversion, where soversion
> is the version number in the SONAME of the shared library.
> Alternatively, if it would be confusing to directly append
> soversion to libraryname (if, for example, libraryname itself
> ends in a number), you should use libraryname-soversion instead.
>
> This is what I believe we are doing. Can you explain more in detail
> what is wrong? From my reading, we are doing what we should do, and
> what you suggest would not be consistent with the above.
>
I'm talking about the the dev and source package, not the library
package, i.e.
using a soversion in
Package: libidn2-0
is fine, but it's wrong for
Source: libidn2-0
Package: libidn2-0-dev
Use
Source: libidn2
Package: libidn2-dev
instead
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature