On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 05:57:03PM -0800, Otto Kekäläinen wrote: > > > > The main purpose of the symbols file is to assist in accurate dependency > > > > generation. That it can also be used to check whether upstreams (that > > > > might not have solid processes to handle library changes), have not > > > > messed up the their symbol modifications, it's a plus. > > > > > > I didn't quite understand what is the benefit with a symbols file that > > > is all wildcards. The package might as well not have any symbols file > > > as far as I see if it is totally void of actual symbol names. > > > > As I mentioned above, the main purpose is to assist with accurate > > dependency generation, at the symbol level to be able to get the lowest > > possible versioned dependencies instead of having to use the version > > for the last ABI change in the library (with shlibs), but please see > > dpkg-shlibdeps(1), where the role of the symbols file (and the simpler > > shlibs file) is explained in more detail. > > Both the dpkg-gensymbols and dpkg-shlibdeps man pages explain that the > purpose of the .symbols file is to track new - and in particular > removed - symbols. > > I didn't get any sensible explanation when and how a .symbols file > would detect any ABI changes if the contents in its entirety are just > wildcards that can match any symbol.
Here is a snippet of the symbol file that you posted in your original message: libcrypto.so.3 libssl3t64 #MINVER# * Build-Depends-Package: libssl-dev *@OPENSSL_3.0.0 3.0.0 *@OPENSSL_3.0.3 3.0.3 This is not "only wildcards": It assigns all symbols from the OPENSSL_3.0.0 symver to libssl-dev 3.0.0, all symbols from the OPENSSL_3.0.3 symver get assigned to libssl-dev 3.0.3. And so on. I'm not sure if it is even possible to produce a symbols file that is "only wildcards" (*@*?) - but in any case that can be had by not having a symbols file. I hope this clarifies some misunderstandings. Chris > I do however not expect an answer from you, as you already replied 3 > messages without actually answering, so I will not just leave the > topic as is. No need for such a tone here.
