> Keep in mind that it is very likely that somewhere in the future we > will have to bump the libc soname for the Hurd, because the idea is to > switch from GNU stdio to libio (which is used for Linux). If the name > is used for dpendencies, I think both glibc2 and libc6 are a bad > choice for the Hurd. The current soname is libc.so.0.2 which suggest > that you should use something like libc0_2.
Is this name really used for dependencies on shared libararies? I would call that a design bug in Debian. It means the packages have to be renamed and all the specs changed when the soname changes, when it's a purely binary change that could be handled transparently by dpkg without changing the sources at all. It should depend on a tag "libc.so.0.2" that the glibc2 package would provide. For things that depend on the -devel package, it really makes no sense to make them depend on a name that encodes the soname.
