On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 12:28:36AM -0800, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 08:58:45AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > > > > So my idea is the following : > > > > - First, I want to provide the libs with a correct soname. It won't be > > > > compatible with upstream until some people use clue sticks, but i'll do > > > > my best for them to improve on that point. Having a correct soname will > > > > enable us to actually use the shlibs mecanism. > > > > > - Now, the problem is that we can't really use the sonames correctly, > > > > because if we succeed in the clue stick batting, we'll have different > > > > sonames, which, in the long term, would be painful. So, I'd like to > > > > provide a dummy gecko-x.y-serial or such package, which would correctly > > > > depend on the libxul package (with strict version if necessary), and the > > > > .shlibs in the libxul-dev package would say to depend on the > > > > gecko-x.y-serial package. > > > > If you don't want to make up sonames (and I think having debian-specific > > > sonames is fine, personally), I think that having libxul provide a virtual > > > package to use in dependencies is the best option (whether that's > > > gecko-x.y-serial, or libxul1debianX, makes no real difference). > > > Will all the tools resolving the dependencies be fine with a dependency > > on a virtual package without one an a real package ? (like for > > zlib1g-dev | libz-dev) > > Yes. See apt's Provides for an example of this.
So why do we keep providing transition packages, then ? > > > There are two advantages to managing sonames even when upstream does not: > > > it lets you interface better with un-packaged software (but *only* if that > > > software is built against the Debian version!), and it allows > > > co-installability of different library versions. You need to decide > > > whether > > > these features are important enough for your application to warrant > > > spinning > > > your own sonames. (My guess is no.) > > > My concern is more about what it becomes when we hopefully get upstream > > to use sonames. Someone suggested me to use specific sonames like > > libxul.so.d1. Does that really work ? Do shlibs work as well with that ? > > > If this is the case, I think i have my solution... > > Yes, sonames can be more or less arbitrary strings. You can certainly use > sonames with "debian" in them with a fairly high degree of confidence that > upstream won't collide with them. THAT is cool. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
