jw+debian at jameswestby.net
Sun Jan 18 00:08:14 GMT 2009
On Sat, 2009-01-17 at 16:40 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 10:02:27AM +0100, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> >James Westby ha scritto:
> >> At the end of last year there was a small transition done to move
> >> from libc-client2007b to libc-client2007d.
> >> However, Debian then reverted this change (with an epoch), as they
> >> didn't want the SONAME bump in lenny.
> >I'm not sure Debian reverted the upload only to avoid SONAME bump,
> >there was probably a problem in the upstream code itself, but I'm not
> >sure about this. Maybe Jonas could shed some light.
> There was no problems with upstream code, it was only to avoid SONAME
> Upstream has no shared library, that is a Debian hack. But historically
> upstream license required (by my interpretation at least) the upstream
> version to be clearly visible in derived code, which lead me to the
> current unusual packaging routine of bumping SONAME with each new
> upstream release.
> In other words: There is no technical reason for SONAME to be changed so
> frequently. It was wrong of me to bump the SONAME of a library in deep
> freeze, but when the "cat was out of the bag" it was suggested to change
> epoch as a simplest workaround.
Thanks for the information.
Do you think that Luca's suggestion to follow you in Debian and pull
your revert of the SONAME, and then "un-transition" the packages that
we had rebuilt for the new SONAME is a good one?
Once lenny is released then we can perform the transition at the same
time as you.
More information about the Ubuntu-motu