Hi Simon On 2020-05-14 17:18:38 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 11:04:38 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > libplacebo now manually links the libraries from spirv-tools > > (libSPIRV-Tools and libSPIRV-Tools-opt) to work-around #951988 and > > #955431. Since the switch to shared libraries, however, dpkg-shlibdeps > > is unable to produce the correct dependencies when linking those > > libraries. > > Are these libraries intended to be a public API, or are they intended to be > a private implementation detail of the CLI tools?
They are intended to be public. From upstream's README: | The library contains all of the | implementation details, and is used in the standalone tools whilst also | enabling integration into other code bases directly. > If they're considered to be public libraries, then there are two options, > depending how stable they are: > > If their API/ABI are totally unmanaged, then they should probably be > provided as static-only, with libplacebo binNMU'd to pick up new versions. > > Or, if their API/ABI are managed, then they should have proper SONAMEs > (see upstream issues, as previously mentioned), and they should be > packaged like shared libraries, with a runtime library package per shared > library (or a single runtime library package if the upstream developer > guarantees that their SONAMEs all change in lockstep, like libglib2.0-0), > and one or more -dev packages. (See Policy ยง8 for details.) According to upstream's README, at least the API should be stable: | The interfaces have stabilized: We don't anticipate making a breaking | change for existing features. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
