[Pkg-voip-commits] r3877 - libpri/trunk/debian

[Mark Purcell]

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> msp at alioth.debian.org wrote:
> > Ready for release?
> No.

Agreed, I was getting ahead of myself..

I have committed a 1.2 version now.. r3878

> If you change the package name, you have to change the SONAME and the
> filename too.

I'm not sure about that.  Isn't it the reverse that applies.

Ie if the soname changes then you need to change the package name to 
something unique as they are not binary compatible and packages build 
against the first library won't function with the second.

But it doesn't break if you rename the package, as often as you like, the only
penalty is that all dependant packages need to be rebuilt every time the
package name changes, which is nugatory if binary compatibility is maintained.
But doesn't break anything. Refer to the suffix c102 libs packages Debian did a 
couple of years back with a libc transition.

> Package name suffixes should be the SONAME.
> 
> Lintian warns about this too:
> libpri1.4: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libpri-bristuffed1.0 libpri1.0

Warning, but not mandatory. The important thing is that different ABI's/ 
sonames package names don't overlap.

Given than we have libpri1.2 in stable, that we can't change, and now that 
Tzafir and yourself have confirmed binary compatibility between 1.2 & 1.4, 
shouldn't we stick with libpri1.2 even though 
package-name-doesnt-match-sonames but it DOES match the last library we 
uploaded, and thus maintain compatibility.

Or should we just revert to the upstream soname and bump the package name to 
libpri1.0?? Which we have never used and is thus safe? (oldstable is libpri1)

Mark
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-voip-maintainers/attachments/20070803/b84d20fb/attachment.pgp