On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 12:57:10PM +0100, KELEMEN Peter wrote: > * Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [20060310 22:07]:
> > Only when the library ABI changes again. > I fail to see how it is useful. New packages that are introduced > to the archive after the ABI change don't have any suffix, so it > is impossible to tell just by looking at the package name what ABI > it conforms to. Hence, I don't see why the need for the suffix > practically forever, because there will be packages conforming to > the same ABI without suffix anyway. Because the suffix is used to distinguish the library from *previous versions* of the same library that were built for a previous ABI. Given that there was at least one version of this package in the Debian archive (testing/unstable, but not stable) that was built against a different ABI suffix, *not* using the ABI suffix on your package breaks upgrades if a user has packages installed that are built against the old ABI. If your library had been present in sarge, this would be an RC bug. -- 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
