Am 04.12.19 um 13:59 schrieb Arturo Borrero Gonzalez: > > > On 12/4/19 1:53 PM, Michael Biebl wrote: >> Hi Arturo >> >> Am 04.12.19 um 12:41 schrieb Arturo Borrero Gonzalez: >>> Package: systemd >>> Version: 243-8 >>> Severity: normal >>> >>> Hi there! >>> >>> The src:iptables debian package (v1.8.4-1) dropped the libiptc-dev and >>> libiptc0 >>> binary packages. The content is included now in either libip4tc or libip6tc. >>> Such change comes from upstream. >>> >>> This package seems to `#include <libiptc/libiptc.h>`, which is fine; But >>> I encourage to please update the build-deps to use libip4tc-dev instead of >>> libiptc-dev. >> >> So, I had a quick look at iptables 1.8.4. >> >> upstream still installs a libiptc.pc and >> >> ./usr/include/libiptc >> ./usr/include/libiptc/xtcshared.h >> ./usr/include/libiptc/libxtc.h >> ./usr/include/libiptc/libip6tc.h >> ./usr/include/libiptc/libiptc.h >> ./usr/include/libiptc/ipt_kernel_headers.h >> >> They did drop the libiptc.so though. >> My recommendation is to simply drop libiptc0 but keep libiptc-dev. >> >> No changes to packages are necessary this way. >> If you drop the libiptc.pc, then this will cause quite a few packages to >> FTBFS. >> > > Thanks for the quick review, really appreciated. > > For the record libiptc.pc is currently included in the other package: > > debian/libip4tc-dev.install: usr/lib/*/pkgconfig/libiptc.pc > > Thinking about your recommendation, it feels a bit weird to have libiptc-dev > but > not the corresponding .so lib package. I wonder if that would make things more > confusing in the long term.
libiptc.pc has Requires: libip4tc libip6tc Which means, libiptc4-dev would have to depend on libptc6-dev. At which point, it wouldn't make sense anymore to split off libip4tc-dev and libip6tc-dev. Moving libiptc.pc into libip4tc-dev feels wrong to me. > My approach was to have libiptc-dev be a transitional package, and Depend on > the > other 2 variants so nobody should be FTBFS'ing. I won't drop the transitional > package until every package updates the Build-Dep to use libip4tc-dev. > > What do you think about that? I would prefer if libiptc-dev stayed around as non-transitional package. It continues to ship libiptc.pc, and depends on libip4tc-dev libip6tc-dev. Not sure about the headers. /usr/include/libiptc/ipt_kernel_headers.h /usr/include/libiptc/libiptc.h /usr/include/libiptc/libxtc.h /usr/include/libiptc/xtcshared.h Those probably belong into libip4tc-dev. I have no strong opinion here. Btw, if you move those headers, don't forget to add a Breaks/Replaces: libiptc-dev to libip4tc-dev. This seems to be missing currently. Regards, Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
