Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> writes:
> On Jan 20, Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> wrote:

>> This also implies that there is arguably an SONAME issue with this library
>> given that two versions of the library with the same SONAME don't provide
>> the same symbols, but I suspect there were really, really good reasons to
>> not change the SONAME.

> The upstream maintainers choose to provide backward compatibility to old 
> binaries but not forward compatibility from old libraries.

Oh, yes, that makes sense and is entirey normal.  I was thinking about it
the wrong way around.  So the root problem is that the dependency was
satisfied for the binary but there was a stray copy of the old library
with the same SONAME in an earlier directory on the search path, which
shadowed the correct library.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)              <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply via email to