On Wednesday 14 July 2010 19:40:08 Daniel J Blueman wrote: > Is there any chance for you to update the lensfun 0.2.4 package in > debian to 0.2.5, which will incorporate a number of updates, > particularly to the lens database. The interface doesn't change, thus > there is compatibility with the current software.
Daniel, I am very keen to upload the new version. The interface maynot change, but there do appear to be additions and more importantly deletions of symbols between versions. --- debian/liblensfun0.symbols (liblensfun0_0.2.5_amd64) +++ dpkg-gensymbolsUJK8cl 2010-07-14 20:29:56.000000000 +1000 @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ liblensfun.so.0 liblensfun0 #MINVER# - _z10_lf_addobjpppvpkvjpfbs3_s...@base 0.2.3 +#MISSING: 0.2.5# _z10_lf_addobjpppvpkvjpfbs3_s...@base 0.2.3 _z10_lf_addobjpppvpkvmpfbs3_s...@base 0.2.3 _z10_lf_addstrpppc...@base 0.2.3 _z10_lf_delobjpp...@base 0.2.3 @@ -14,12 +14,13 @@ _z18_lf_camera_comparepkv...@base 0.2.3 _z20_lf_xml_printf_mlstrp8_gstringpkcs2...@base 0.2.3 _z22_lf_lens_compare_scorepk6lflenss1_p13lffuzzystrcmpp...@base 0.2.3 + _z23_lf_detect_cpu_featur...@base 0.2.5 _z25_lf_ptr_array_find_sortedpk10_gptrarraypvpfipkvs...@base 0.2.3 _z27_lf_ptr_array_insert_sortedp10_gptrarraypvpfipkvs...@base 0.2.3 _z27_lf_ptr_array_insert_uniquep10_gptrarraypvpfipkvs3_epfvs...@base 0.2.3 - _z7_lf_r...@base 0.2.3 +#MISSING: 0.2.5# _z7_lf_r...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfdatabase4loade...@base 0.2.3 - _zn10lfdatabase4loadepkcs...@base 0.2.3 +#MISSING: 0.2.5# _zn10lfdatabase4loadepkcs...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfdatabase4loadepkcs...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfdatabase4loa...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfdatabase4saveepkpk7lfmountpkpk8lfcamerapkpk6lfl...@base 0.2.3 @@ -27,12 +28,12 @@ _zn10lfdatabase7destro...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier10initializeepk6lflens13lfpixelformatffff10lflenstyp...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier12getautoscal...@base 0.2.3 - _zn10lfmodifier16addcolorcallbackepfvpvffs0_iieis...@base 0.2.3 +#MISSING: 0.2.5# _zn10lfmodifier16addcolorcallbackepfvpvffs0_iieis...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier16addcolorcallbackepfvpvffs0_iieis...@base 0.2.3 - _zn10lfmodifier16addcoordcallbackepfvpvpfieis...@base 0.2.3 +#MISSING: 0.2.5# _zn10lfmodifier16addcoordcallbackepfvpvpfieis...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier16addcoordcallbackepfvpvpfieis...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier19addcolorcallbackcciepk6lflens13lfpixelform...@base 0.2.3 - _zn10lfmodifier19addsubpixelcallbackepfvpvpfieis...@base 0.2.3 +#MISSING: 0.2.5# _zn10lfmodifier19addsubpixelcallbackepfvpvpfieis...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier19addsubpixelcallbackepfvpvpfieis...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier21addcoordcallbackscale...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier22addsubpixelcallbacktcaer14lflenscalibt...@base 0.2.3 @@ -41,15 +42,17 @@ _zn10lfmodifier26addcoordcallbackdistortioner21lflenscalibdistorti...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier6createepk6lflens...@base 0.2.3 _zn10lfmodifier7destro...@base 0.2.3 - _zn13lfextmodifier11addcallbackep10_gptrarrayp14lfcallbackdatai...@base 0.2.3 +#MISSING: 0.2.5# _zn13lfextmodifier11addcallbackep10_gptrarrayp14lfcallbackdatai...@base 0.2.3 _zn13lfextmodifier11addcallbackep10_gptrarrayp14lfcallbackdatai...@base 0.2.3 _zn13lfextmodifier17modifycoord_scaleepv...@base 0.2.3 _zn13lfextmodifier21modifycoord_dist_fov1epv...@base 0.2.3 + _zn13lfextmodifier21modifycoord_tca_poly3epv...@base 0.2.5 _zn13lfextmodifier22modifycoord_dist_poly3epv...@base 0.2.3 _zn13lfextmodifier22modifycoord_dist_poly5epv...@base 0.2.3 _zn13lfextmodifier22modifycoord_tca_linearepv...@base 0.2.3 _zn13lfextmodifier23modifycoord_dist_ptlensepv...@base 0.2.3 _zn13lfextmodifier23modifycoord_undist_fov1epv...@base 0.2.3 + _zn13lfextmodifier23modifycoord_untca_poly3epv...@base 0.2.5 _zn13lfextmodifier24modifycoord_undist_poly3epv...@base 0.2.3 _zn13lfextmodifier24modifycoord_undist_poly5epv...@base 0.2.3 _zn13lfextmodifier24modifycoord_untca_linearepv...@base 0.2.3 I am unsure if these are private symbols and thus can be ignored, or if an soname bump is warranted. Any advise which can be provided would be great. Mark
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
