On Thu, 2008-08-28 at 13:46 +0200, arne anka wrote: > > The name is just a name, it does not have to relate to the current > > SONAME or anything else. Also, the name cannot be changed within Debian > > without also changing every other reverse dependency (i.e. a library > > transition). I see no point in doing that, even after Lenny, until > > upstream need a new SONAME. > > sorry, but i still don't get it. what is that 0.0 supposed to mean and > when would it change to, say, 1.0?
Upstream have misinterpreted the libtool manual and (wrongly) implement --release when not needed. It would change only if upstream need to change the ABI/API of the library. There are a few misunderstandings in the versioning of tslib which I expect to discuss with upstream. However, there is no point doing it now as I could not upload a fixed tslib package until after Lenny anyway. > if the lib is called libts-0.0.so.0 where does that 0.0 come from (i mean, > based on which rule is it 0.0 and not 1.0)? In configure.ac for tslib, LT_RELEASE is set to 0.0 when it does not need to be set at all. Any change will be handled carefully in Debian, in conjunction with the maintainers of reverse dependencies of tslib in Debian. > >> to make xglamo compile with tslib i changed the name to tslib-1.0 and > >> the Version line to 1.0-4 and it went straight through. > > > > Don't do that. Change how xglamo looks for tslib, it should ask > > pkg-config for tslib-0.0 - also the version should *NEVER* include the > > Debian version string. The version of tslib is 1.0 - nothing more. > > > > xglamo cannot modify /usr/lib/pkgconfig/tslib-0.0.pc, so for xglamo to > > build in Debian, it must ask pkg-config for 'tslib-0.0'. > > well, it is a build outside any of debian's repositories, just for my > pleasure -- but ok, i found the line in configure.ac and changed it. If you (or anyone else) needs to build against Debian or package for Debian, the change needs to be in xglamo, as you describe. It is not wise to change the name of the .pc file only in Debian as this causes needless patches in other reverse dependencies. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
