> > Policy 8.1 is clear - if the bug documents a crash in an application > > that was not present before the library was updated and the library > > has not changed the SONAME or package name, the library justifies an > > RC bug. > > Actually, Policy 8.1 doesn't say anything about when to change the > soname. Perhaps it should?
The bit about the SONAME is implicit in the change of package name (as checked by lintian) and if the package name has changed, then the application will have had to have been rebuilt against the new library API so a crash in those circumstances is still a bug, this time caused by a buggy library AFTER a correct transition. I was just pointing out that if the transition is correct, the bug does not have to be RC. Policy mandates that the library must transition cleanly - the SONAME is just the mechanism used to change the package name which is what actually determines what gets installed. Bugs which result from an updated library package being installed when it should have been held back are examples of an incorrect library transition and break Policy 8.1. There is no need for Policy to delve into the mechanism of complying with Policy as long as the result of the changes has the effect of compliance. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpF1J19eic6N.pgp
Description: PGP signature
