On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 01:41:03PM +0100, Loic Dachary wrote: > Steve Langasek writes: > > You can't leave the name as it is. If you can't support a stable ABI, you > > can't have a shared library shipped in a stable release. Given that the > > name "libopenalpp-cvs" was already used in sarge, you must either change > the > > binary package name or drop the shared library to have openalpp-cvs in > > etch.
> > > The binary was recompiled on the latest unstable and since the upstream > > > version changed I understood it was not necessary to prepend the c2a. > > > Was I wrong ? > > New upstream versions are only relevant if they include soname changes. > I understand. I'll maintain shared library numbers and change > them when appropriate. I'll upload an openalpp-cvs1 to avoid problems > with the sarge openalpp-cvs package. Hmm, I hope you mean libopenalpp-cvs1 here. There's no reason for the source package name to change, or even the -dev package name; it's only the library package which is an issue, because this is the package that other packages will depend on, so the name has to change when the ABI changes or dependent packages break on upgrade. > Thanks for educating me and my apologies for not being a > literate debian citizen. Heh, you're certainly not the only maintainer who doesn't understand library versioning... -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
