Marvin Renich <m...@renich.org> writes: > Thanks for this and the rest of your explanation.
> I'm not convinced that this shouldn't have resulted in an SONAME bump, > and Steve Langasek also seems to think this should have been handled > differently, but everyone else seems to be happy with the current > solution. I don't think Steve is making the point that it first appears he is. His patch was merged instead of the one I pointed you at (it just had less useful context-setting discussion). His point was specifically about avoiding the transition for the libcurl versions linked with gnutls and nss. Since they don't have the problem with the OpenSSL data structure change, they can continue to also provide the old SONAMEs. I'm not sure I got the details precisely right, but my tentative understanding is that we would have to break SONAME compatibility with upstream's defaults and therefore with other distributions including libcurl in order to make the two packages co-installable, because libcurl3 included libcurl.so.4 because of the previous upstream SONAME bump that Debian didn't believe needed an SONAME bump. So we either need to make a libcurl4 that conflicts with libcurl3 (since it has to also provide libcurl.so.4), or we'd need to call our version libcurl5 or something, which would break compatibility with everyone else. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
