On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:27:20PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> I have verified that libjson0 with just symlinks works (running
> psensor), and building with libjson0-dev ends with libjson-c2 as
^^^^^^^^^^
> dependency (upstart).> Thus I am ready to upload the package to unstable. Again, you should not be renaming the libjson0 package to libjson-c2. The binary package name should *only* change when there is a backwards-incompatible ABI change, which there isn't here as long as libjson.so.0 is provided as a symlink. So this should be a *non* transition. Having newly-built packages end up with an ELF dependency on libjson-c.so.2 is fine - but the binary package name should remain libjson0. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org > Ondrej > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Ondřej Surý <ond...@sury.org> wrote: > > Good question. I guess I got stuck in the upstream way of 'compatibility'. > > > > That's the best solution. I'll prepare the packages in experimental and > > we'll see. > > > > Ondřej Surý > > > > On 16. 5. 2013, at 12:03, Julien Cristau <jcris...@debian.org> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:25:32 +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Steve, > >>> > >>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> wrote: > >>>> Hi Ondřej, > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 03:12:02PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > >>>>> JSON-C upstream has renamed the library from libjson.so to > >>>>> libjson-c.so, headers are now in /usr/include/json-c and pkg-config is > >>>>> called json-c. > >>>> > >>>>> There's a compatibility layer (symlinks and libjson.so.0), but since > >>>>> the library has so few r-deps, I feel that we might not need it to > >>>>> make things more simple in the future. The upstream is planning to > >>>>> drop the compatibility layer in next release anyway, so we would have > >>>>> to do the transition in some other point in time. > >>>> > >>>> Not necessarily. If the ABI has not changed, there is no reason that we > >>>> should not keep the compatibility layer in place in Debian > >>>> *indefinitely*. > >>>> > >>>> For another example of this, see libcurl3-gnutls. > >>> > >>> There are some new symbols in libjson-c library and _no_ symbols in > >>> libjson > >> Why isn't libjson.so.0 a symlink to libjson-c.so.2 then? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Julien > > > > -- > Ondřej Surý <ond...@sury.org> >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
