Please ignore the mail below, I think I understand that part now.
libavdevice53 itself depends on libavcodec5{3|4} depending on where it
comes from.Paul On 21-03-13 08:04, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi Andrey, > > On 21-03-13 07:46, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:17:50PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: >>>> Maybe I've picked the wrong example, the actual problem was with >>>> libavdevice53, the same soname is used for either 0.8.5-1 and 9.3-1, >>>> but 9.3-1 links to libavcodec54 while 0.8.5-1 links to libavcodec53, so >>>> my binary ended up importing either libavcodec53 and libavcodec54 when >>>> both were installed and did not work. >>> If this is true, and I must say I may have had the same experience, >>> isn't this hinting at a bug in libavdevice53, not being stable enough to >>> keep the same SONAME? I think you should file a bug against libavdevice53. >> Why? The problem is caused by indirect dependency on both libavcodec53 and >> libavcodec54, not by ABI breakage. > > Could you please explain what the problem is then becasue I don't see it > (I really want to learn here). As I understand it, if you get > libavdevice53 in a newer version it should still work with stuff that > was build against an older version, right? If it breaks, the soname > should be updated and the packagename changed, so that the libraries can > be co-installed. So I guess you see the problem elsewhere? > > Paul > > >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
