On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 11:40:28PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
> I have a library package at version 2.01, and the soversion in it is 0.0.0
> (seems upstream hadn't heard about library versioning). Now, I'm
> considering packaging a new upstream version (2.3.4, still in prerelease
> though), but they *still* haven't heard about library versioning, so
> compiling the new source still just yields 0.0.0. And the new version is
> binary-incompatible with the old release (some C++ classes changed).
>
> What course of action is recommended here? I guess that perhaps I could
> hack the upstream makefiles to add some library version, but then which
> version to use? Or just rename the library? Hmm... or simply drop the old
> version, since I seem to maintain all the packages that currently depend
> on it anyway?
What's the original package name?
I suggest that you call the package something like libfoo2.3-0,
version 2.3.4-<revision>, and have it Conflict/Replace the old version
(and maybe Provide: libfoo0 so that you can then have later versions
Conflict/Replace/Provide: libfoo0 until they get it right). Then the
dependencies of other packages will not be satisfied with the new
package. However, locally compiled stuff will break. I don't see a
good way around that, unless you start calling the library itself by a
different name, but that's probably evil.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg
Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/
