On 24 June 2018 at 08:38, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
|
| But nomatter what I do, I end up with
|
| W: libgsl24: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libgsl23
|
| ie the library built by upstream is built as libgsl.so.23.1.0 -- even though
| upstream configure.ac has a long comment header ending in
|
| dnl gsl-2.5 libgsl 24:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
|
| as well as
|
| GSL_CURRENT=24
| GSL_REVISION=0
| GSL_AGE=1
|
| [...]
|
| GSL_LT_VERSION="${GSL_CURRENT}:${GSL_REVISION}:${GSL_AGE}"
| AC_SUBST(GSL_LT_VERSION)
|
| I am stumped. Why does the '24' version not get through?
Looks like upstream builds as libgsl.23.1.0 based on a quick build in Docker:
root@fcae44906b06:/tmp/gsl/gsl-2.5# ls -ltr /usr/local/lib/
total 35064
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1097936 Jun 24 13:45 libgslcblas.so.0.0.0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 20 Jun 24 13:45 libgslcblas.so.0 ->
libgslcblas.so.0.0.0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 20 Jun 24 13:45 libgslcblas.so ->
libgslcblas.so.0.0.0
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 949 Jun 24 13:45 libgslcblas.la
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1884714 Jun 24 13:45 libgslcblas.a
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 12038200 Jun 24 13:45 libgsl.so.23.1.0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Jun 24 13:45 libgsl.so.23 -> libgsl.so.23.1.0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Jun 24 13:45 libgsl.so -> libgsl.so.23.1.0
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 918 Jun 24 13:45 libgsl.la
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 20858130 Jun 24 13:45 libgsl.a
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jun 24 13:45 pkgconfig
root@fcae44906b06:/tmp/gsl/gsl-2.5#
What should we do here? We can't stay at 23 as that was an issue which lead
to your original bug report. We probably should not use 24 which may come
next. Shall we do libgsl23-1 ?
Dirk
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
