Hi, just innocent bystander here with an observation:
These two options: a) > I do agree it's the correct solution though, and it would be a good > opportunity > to finally sync SONAME with upstream b) > Because of 1 I think we should change the package name (and SONAME) for > libcurl3. I don't think 2 is appropriate. are mutually exclusive, so even if we rename the share library packages to libcurl4*, they would have to conflict with libcurl3* because they would contain same files. And the SONAME is already libcurl.so.4 (at least on stretch): $ objdump -p /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcurl* | grep SONAME SONAME libcurl-gnutls.so.4 SONAME libcurl-gnutls.so.4 SONAME libcurl-gnutls.so.4 SONAME libcurl.so.4 SONAME libcurl.so.4 SONAME libcurl.so.4 So in this case, unfortunately, bumping the SONAME is actually something different than changing package name to match to SONAME of the library. Perhaps changing the package name and adding Breaks to packages using CURLOPT_SSL_CTX_FUNCTION and adding Breaks/Replaces to libcurl3* package might be most sane option. On the other hand, it would be very difficult to correctly backport newer curl (people are asking for HTTP/2 support) without bumping the SONAME to libcurl.so.5. Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý <ond...@sury.org>
