NB: dh-acc might help Le sam. 4 janv. 2025 à 14:14, Jérémy Lal <kapo...@melix.org> a écrit :
> > > Le sam. 4 janv. 2025 à 13:35, Nicholas Guriev <nicho...@guriev.su> a > écrit : > >> On 04.01.2025 03:26:56 MSK you wrote: >> > - adaparse could be compiled and distributed (along with a manpage and >> > docs/cli.md) >> >> My first priority was to provide the shared library. I didn't want the >> binary >> was available in $PATH when dependent packages were installed. So there >> are >> two options: >> 1) either install adaparse into a private directory like /usr/libexec; >> 2) or place it in separate -bin package. >> >> Both variants rise questions of whether this testing tool is really >> useful at >> run-time. And to give preference to one of the options, we need to >> understand >> how this binary will be used. >> > > OK, let's not package it for now. > > Another concern is the ABI compatibility issue. > **As far as I know**: > In debian, only a major soname bump is eligible for a library transition > (recompiling reverse build-deps). > However in C++ there is no guarantee that a 2.9.1 > 2.9.2 update will be > ABI-compatible, and Upstream doesn't seem to > be paying any kind of attention to it. > A simple way to address this issue is to manage a debian-specific soname > version (date-based, or index-based), that > is incremented with each update of libadaxx.so. > This could be improved by using an external tool like > abi-compliance-checker, though I'm not sure it works perfectly. > > Ideally Upstream should commit to maintain ABI-compatibility in the soname > version, but it seems they're pushing to > embed the library instead, so they probably won't support that. > > Jérémy >
