On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:50 AM, sda <dmitry.serpok...@gmail.com> wrote: > as we recently discussed on IRC the results of the patch will lead th the > changing of a SONAME. illustration is below. >
Please note that this was also explained in my initial mail. > current data: > >> objdump -x /usr/lib/libeina.so.0.0.1 | grep -i soname > SONAME libeina.so.0 > > as we may assume after this patch the changes will be: > >> objdump -x /usr/lib/libeina.so.0.0.1 | grep -i soname > SONAME libeina-PREFIX.so.0 > > where "PREFIX" is some thing i definitely dislike because here's the > Novell/openSUSE "Shared Library Packaging Policy": > http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/Shared_Library_Packaging_Policy > > rules are strict and straight forward (like): > > * SONAME - the name (query for it using objdump -x libfoo.so.1 | grep SONAME) > a shared library is referred as by the dynamic loader. > > * Shared libraries in /lib{,64} or /usr/lib{,64} shall be packaged into > rpms whose name is "lib" + $NAME + $NUM. > SONAME is *NOT* necessarily libfoo.so.X. The use of -release is valid. I don't want to turn this into a flame, but your distro should not rely on everything using -version-info only to create package names. > * $NAME is formed by cutting off the prefix "lib" and suffix ".so.*" from the > SONAME > > * $NUM contains only decimal digits and underscores. > > * $NUM is equal to the shared library SONAME number with dots replaced > by underscores. > > in this case the patch will increase the repository maintenance by > manually substituting values in "Name:" and "BuildRequires:" fields of a > spec files. > > patch is completely useless for all projects developed/maintained in OBS > (openSUSE Build Service) because Build Service provides automated > rebuild of all packages which depend on the selected one if sources of > the selected package are changed (this is done by automatic control of a > "Release:" field and conservative approach for the dependencies - > they'd rebuild if the values of "Version"/"Release" are changed which is > a sign that sources are modified somehow). > As per IRC too, it's useless ONLY for OBS, which uses a pessimistic approach and rebuilds all the reverse depenencies when there's an update to a library (if my understanding is correct). So you're basically proposing to drop the change only before your particular build system allows you to avoid it. But please think about people which do not use OBS, and especially people who compile directly from source > so i wote for "$NUM" changes and suppose that it's a way better than > changes of a "$NAME". all the info about "rev1", "rev2", "RC", "alpha", > etc. should be visible on E official sites, in Changelog or in Summary. I did not write a patch changing this NUM because raster he opposed to this, as he wants to keep libfoo.so.1 for the final release (as per the email I forwarded). Raster, gustavo, other devs: what do you think ? Is it sane enough to get merged ? (note that the idea behind this is to increment the @release_info@ on each API/ABI change, not globally on every release like this one) Regards, Albin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save $200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco. 300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
