On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 at 20:50:27 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > Removing -V would be very wrong. Either leave it as-is or make sure it's kept > up to date with the highest version from .symbols.
Right, that's what I thought. The worst that can happen from using bare -V (with no argument) is a slightly over-strict versioned dependency, which is a lot better than a too-weak dependency; and .symbols files mean library users usually don't pick up the over-strict dependency anyway, so no harm is done. Am I right in thinking that plain dh_shlibdeps (without -V) is only acceptable for libraries that literally never add new ABI, which are vanishingly rare? > On December 20, 2017 8:35:18 PM GMT+01:00, Jeremy Bicha <[email protected]> > wrote: > > We have several packages that pass the dh_makeshlibs -V flag. Simon > says he thinks it's not harmful since the symbols file takes > precedence. I think we should go ahead and remove it then That doesn't follow: -V not being harmful is a reason why we should *not* remove it. For packages with no .symbols (C++ and udebs), -V generates strict dependencies, which sometimes stall migrations but never lead to broken systems. If a particular package's use of -V is sufficiently annoying, then we can decide to invest the effort in using -V${abi_version} for that package. smcv
