On 5 August 2017 at 12:35, Guillem Jover wrote:
| Hi!
|
| On Fri, 2017-08-04 at 23:10:49 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > On 5 August 2017 at 00:04, Alf Gaida wrote:
| > | like the subject says libgsl lacks some breaks and replaces, that breaks
the upgrade path:
|
| > | The following should fix that
| > |
| > | diff --git a/debian/control b/debian/control
| > | index 5e12819..486169d 100644
| > | --- a/debian/control
| > | +++ b/debian/control
| > | @@ -12,8 +12,9 @@ Architecture: any
| > | Multi-Arch: same
| > | Pre-Depends: ${misc:Pre-Depends}
| > | Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
| > | +Breaks: libgsl2
| > | Conflicts: gsl, libgsl0, libgsl0ldbl
| > | -Replaces: gsl, libgsl0 (<= 1.9-4), libgsl0ldbl (<= 1.16+dfsg-4)
| > | +Replaces: gsl, libgsl0 (<= 1.9-4), libgsl0ldbl (<= 1.16+dfsg-4), libgsl2
| > | Suggests: gsl-ref-psdoc | gsl-doc-pdf | gsl-doc-info | gsl-ref-html
| > | Description: GNU Scientific Library (GSL) -- library package
| > | The GNU Scientific Library (GSL) is a collection of routines for
| >
| > Thanks for that.
| >
| > One possibly alternative would be to put libgslcblas.so.0.0.0 into its own
| > libgslcblas depend on it as this library has no soname.
|
| Strictly speaking, libgslcblas does have a SONAME:
|
| $ objdump -p /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgslcblas.so.0 | grep SONAME
| SONAME libgslcblas.so.0
|
| which means to me that it should guarantee some ABI stability,
Yes. I have never seen it change its soname in all these years.
| otherwise this library should become a private library by using RPATH,
| or be folded into the main libgsl library?
|
| And IMO, splitting this library appears as the only correct solution
| here, because:
|
| - Both shared libraries have different SONAMEs that's (I'm assuming)
| why you've had to keep adding Replaces against the old packages when
| bumping the SONAME for the main library.
| - This causes transition problems, as both old and new main library
| packages cannot be installed at the same time, even though by
| themselves alone there would be no filesystem conflicts. Which in
| turn means we cannot have a mix of packages linking against the
| old and new libraries, or in worse conditions a mix of a new -dev
| using the new librs with some other packages using the old libs.
| - If (but I'm not sure if that's possible) one can link only against
| the libgslcblas library, that would cause breakage in case the
| SONAME gets bumped as as the package is not keyed on that, and
| programs linked against the old SONAME would stop working.
I agree. It's a bit more work, but the better fix.
| > But it is probably
| > easier to go with 'Breaks: ' as you suggest.
|
| I'd consider that the wrong fix TBH.
|
| > The thing that is unpleasant is that we probably need to keep adding the old
| > soname libraries to debian/control as this progresses.
|
| Not anymore after the libraries have been split. Or perhaps I don't
| understand your concern?
Yes, it should help with that.
Thanks for the input!
Dirk
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
