libgig 4.0.0 qsampler 4.2.0 gigedit 1.0.0

[Jaromír Mikeš]

2016-11-22 12:29 GMT+01:00 James Cowgill <jcowgill at debian.org>:
> Hi,
>
> On 21/11/16 20:42, Jaromír Mikeš wrote:
>> 2016-11-21 19:43 GMT+01:00 Jaromír Mikeš <mira.mikes at gmail.com>:
>>> I've contacted upstream ... let's see what's happend
>>
>> Here we go ... answer from upstream ...
>> -------------
>> Wrong revision. This is the correct one of the actual changes you are
>> interested in here:
>>
>> http://svn.linuxsampler.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi?view=revision&revision=2572
>
> I still think upstream is wrong here but whatever.
>
>> In this revision several things happened. First of all, it added AKAI support
>> to libgig. Since the AKAI source files were based on libakai, which in turn
>> was and is released under LGPL, while the rest of libgig is released under GPL
>> terms, I had to split those libgig parts into separate .so files, to avoid any
>> license confusions.
>
> Good so far...
>
>> Having a 2nd .so file built though, this triggered issues with the Debian
>> packaging scripts as far as I can remember. So I was forced to move the .so
>> files from /usr/lib to a common subdirectory /usr/lib/libgig.
>
> Oh no...
>
>> And by the way, the Debian packaging scripts coming with the libgig upstream
>> version build, install, and behave just fine on Debian! :-)
>>
>> As you might see in the Debian packaging scripts coming with the libgig
>> upstream version there are postinst and postrm rules which ensure that
>> /usr/lib/libgig is added / removed to /etc/ld.so.conf.
>
> This is probably the worst part - why on earth is libgig messing with
> the ld.so config ?! It seems to me that upstream don't really know what
> they're doing with this.
>
>> So what we can do?
>
> Since upstream have added /usr/lib/libgig to the ld.so path it seems
> that they do want those libraries to be public after all.
>
> I suggest that you:
> - split libakai into a separate library package
> - move both libraries into /usr/lib/<multiarch>
> - bash upstream until they do this properly :)

Ok ... it looks like a plan ;)
Should we have also 2 separate -dev packages gig and akai ?

best regards

mira