On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:28 AM Sebastian Ramacher
<sramac...@debian.org> wrote:
> On 2020-07-11 22:51:13 +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> As far as I understand it, a tighter dependency would make britney
> consider them as having to transition together, avoiding the issue with
> the autopkgtests. It would recogince that migrating protobuf would make
> ignition-msgs uninstallable, and so it would try them together.
That sounds logical to me.
> > Without too much thinking I've prepared an update which embeds an ABI
> > version to the library package (see attached diff) that you can depend
> > on, but I don't think that would help. It will be the same as
> > depending on the named library.
>
> Since ignition-msgs is the only package that has this issue, something
> like the following should be enough:
>
> In debian/control:
>
> Depends: libprotobuf-dev (>= ${protobuf:Upstream-Version}), libprotobuf-dev
> (< ${protobuf:Upstream-Version}.1)
>
> In debian/rules:
>
> override_dh_gencontrol:
> dh_gencontrol -- -Vprotobuf:Upstream-Version="$(shell dpkg-query -W
> -f '$${Source:Upstream-Version}' libprotobuf-dev)"
>
> (This might be a little to tight and depending on >= X.Y, < X.(Y+1)
> would be enough).
Right, in minor versions Google does not intend to change ABI I'm pretty sure.
> But yes, depending on a protobuf-abi-$VER provided by libprotobuf-dev
> could also work. It wouldn't work if provided by the shared library,
> though, as they are co-installable.
This is correct - I just feel misunderstandable that -dev would
provide an ABI version and will change that to API if needed.
@Jochen: You need to update ignition-fuel-tools anyway. Would a
stricter dependency on libprotobuf-dev be enough for you or should I
provide an API string in libprotobuf-dev for you?
Regards,
Laszlo/GCS
