On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 09:29:53PM -0800, Otto Kekäläinen wrote: > About this suggested change (penging at > https://salsa.debian.org/mariadb-team/mariadb-server/-/merge_requests/68):
> From the announcement message > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2024/02/msg00000.html > lists we can find in > https://people.canonical.com/~vorlon/armhf-time_t/source-packages > lists: > ``` > mariadb: libmariadbd19 > ``` > However nothing about MariaDB is elsewhere. This finding about > libmariadbd19 seems like a false positive as nothing depends on it. Lack of reverse-dependencies in the Debian archive doesn't make it a false-positive. It exists as a runtime library package; third party packages including local packages on end-user systems could link against it. > The library is used for building embedded servers and typically > statically linked. I am not inclined to merge this change unless > somebody points out some additional motivations why it is needed. > If the libmariadb3 package was affected, it would be another story, > but this libmariadbd19 is not worth renaming. If it's inconsequential then I don't know why you care what its name is? If it's "typically statically linked" you could stop shipping the .so altogether, which I think is a better outcome overall for system quality if you don't want to support it as a shared library. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
