Ming Hua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Package: libpcmanx-core0 > Version: 0.3.7-1 > Severity: serious > Justification: Policy 8.6 > > Hi Emfox, > > First thank you for the fast packaging of the new PCManX release. I > feel almost sorry to report an RC bug against it, but this is a serious > issue and I hope it gets addressed. > > I was looking through the symbol-based shlibs system [1] the other day, > and found that libpcmanx-core0 0.3.7-1 is dropping symbols compared with > 0.3.5-2 (the etch version, 0.3.5-5 should have the same symbols as > 0.3.5-2) [2]. > > 1. http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/ImprovedDpkgShlibdeps > 2. Any link to the symbol files on > http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/mole/seedsymbols?pkgname=libpcmanx-core0 > > This means there is ABI breakage in the shared library libpcmanx-core0, > and there should be an SONAME bump. And I can confirm it -- I > downgraded pcmanx-gtk2 to 0.3.5-5 version and kept libpcmanx-core0 at > 0.3.7-1, all dependencies are satisfied, however pcmanx-gtk2 crashes > when I try to connect any BBS. I assume this crash is easily > reproducible (I can provide backtraces if you can't reproduce it). The > 0.3.7-1 version of pcmanx-gtk2 works fine.
Yes, I could reproduce it. > The only reverse dependencies of libpcmanx-core0 are pcmanx-gtk2 and > mozilla-plugin-pcmanx, so the ABI integrity is not that important. I > also realize this is an upstream issue. Nontheless I'd like to raise > this issue and hope something can be done about it. > > The best solution would be teaching upstream to understand the SONAME > issue and bump it. Or we can make it a private library (but I don't > really know how). Or make very strict dependency between the > applications and the library. It's up to the upsteam, strict dependency is the best solution now. > Let me know what you think, According to my knowledge, the lib is just for sharing between pcmanx-gtk2 and mozilla-plugin-pcmanx, and upstream do not have plan to open the API for generic use, so I'd change the dependency. But it seems there is no good way to solve the current problem, that is, we cannot stop people from upgrading libpcmanx-core0 but keep pcmanx-gtk2, or if you have good suggestion, do please tell me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
