[Android-tools-devel] RFS: android-platform-external-libselinux_6.0.0+r26-1

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

殷啟聰:
> Hi Hans,
> 
> Actually not any packages that depend on libunwind and libselinux are
> uploaded so far, so I don't think it is necessary to upload to experimental.

The point is that _all_ of the SDK packages in Debian need to be at the same
version.  So we shouldn't put 6.0.0 packages into unstable until we know we'll
shortly be uploading 6.0.0 versions of all the Android SDK packages. Since we
have a lot of 5.1.1 packages that very close to ready, I think we should get
those 5.1.1 packages all uploaded and working before including any newer
packages.  That then means we'll have some larger chunk of the Android SDK
working in Debian.  Plus some of those 5.1.1 packages have to go through the
NEW queue.

> About the removal of version info, well actually we don't know it. We don't
> know whether we should put API Level 23 or Android version 6 or others as
> the version in SONAME, so it'd better not to maintain it.

If you want to actively remove that stuff, its ok by me.  But as long as the
SONAME version is very low, e.g (1.0.0) then its very unlikely that upstream
will use a lower version, so functionally, keeping that 1.0.0 version is the
same as having no SONAME.  Therefore its very low risk to keep it in place.
And it'll be no maintenance work unless we change it.

.hc

> Regards,
> Kai-Chung Yan
> 
> Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at> 於 2015年11月13日週五 03:51 寫道：
> 
>>
>> Thanks for the update!  The changes look good.  I'm worried that we don't
>> have
>> all of 5.1.1 uploaded yet, and all the SDK packages need to have synced
>> versions.  I'll upload the 6.0.0 packages to experimental for now, then
>> once
>> we have all of 6.0 updated, we can push them to unstable.
>>
>> About removing the lib SONAME version, its hard to say if that's the right
>> way.  It is definitely the right way if we are not going to maintain that
>> version. But I don't think having it is doing any harm, so I think its low
>> priority work.  Getting all the build-tools and platform-tools for 5.1.1 is
>> more important so we can have a complete set in Debian, IMHO.
>>
>> .hc
>>
>>
>> 殷啟聰:
>>> Hi Android Tools Team,
>>>
>>> I've updated SELinux for Android to android-6.0.0_r26. This is a rather
>>> simple package so it will be easy to review.
>>>
>>> Note that in this version I removed the version info, here are the
>> changes:
>>>
>>>   * android-libselinux only installs libselinux.so without version
>> postfix
>>>   * android-libselinux-dev won't install symlinks to libselinux.so
>>>   * The SONAME in libselinux.so is "libselinux.so" withoud version
>> postfix
>>>
>>> I am thinking of making such changes to other AOSP packages since AOSP
>> does
>>> not maintain the version info.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Kai-Chung Yan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Android-tools-devel mailing list
>>> Android-tools-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
>>>
>> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/android-tools-devel
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Android-tools-devel mailing list
>> Android-tools-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
>> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/android-tools-devel
>