cctbx debian package: new commit

[picca]

Baptiste Carvello <devel at baptiste-carvello.net> writes:

> Le 03/10/2012 11:59, Radostan Riedel a écrit :
>> On Wed, 03. Oct 11:11, Baptiste Carvello wrote:
>>> 2) there are a few C++ applications which depend on cctbx, the one I
>>> know is FOX ( http://vincefn.net/Fox/ , objcryst-fox in Debian). For
>>> those use cases, should we still build a libcctbx-dev package with the
>>> headers and static libs (for those we don't need to care about ABI
>>> stability)?
>> I think this is a very important point here. Let's assume I want to extent the cctbx by 
>> adding a module, for let's say absorbtion correction and I want to implement a 
>> method called "multiscan" and I want to make a fast python boost extension to integrate 
>> with my python code. I need some symbols from any of the shared libs in cctbx.
>> How could this be done in Debian or in any other distribution?
>
> Well, this use case is more difficult than FOX. Static libs might not
> work here, because you would end up with 2 copies of the cctbx libs
> loaded in the same process. I'm not sure boost-python can deal with
> that. I don't really see a way to support this use case in Debian
> without ABI stability.


In that case you rebuild a full debian package with the modification AND
you need to rebuild FOX to take thoses modification into account.
We should also use a strict versionning to avoid installation of a new
cctbx library and Broke.

I am not completly sur of the right way to reduce the inconvenient
here. So the input of a more experimented DD woud be nice.


Thanks


Fred
-- 
GPG public key 4096R/4696E015 2011-02-14
    fingerprint = E92E 7E6E 9E9D A6B1 AA31  39DC 5632 906F 4696 E015
uid  Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel <picca at synchrotron-soleil.fr>

GPG public key 1024D/A59B1171 2009-08-11
    fingerprint = 1688 A3D6 F0BD E4DF 2E6B  06AA B6A9 BA6A A59B 1171
uid  Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel <picca at debian.org>