Hi, Cyril
Thank you for your report. Please see below.
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Package: libconfig8
> Version: 1.3.2-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: MEH.
>
> Various issues:
> - libconfig8 conflicts against libconfig6. Coinstallability is the
> whole point of changing package name…
>
Well... this version does break ABI (and makes some changes at the API
level, IIRC)
... and the conflicts is there to try and have dpkg replace the older
package.
You are right about co-installability being desirable, though.
> - the .la doesn't belong to this package. Rather to the corresponding
> -dev. This way, the conflicts can go away, too.
>
Yup, you're right. I overlooked it.
> - why having a versioned -dev is you only support one version at a
> time?
Best Current Practice
> That doesn't help your reverse dependencies that b-depend on
> libconfig6-dev (which you stop providing, so they need a sourceful
> upload).
>
... but you are right in that it is inconsistent with other aspects of
the package
> - the same holds for the ++ parts.
>
Of course
> Various random clues:
> - get rid of the .la, or put it in the -dev package. Make your
> libraries co-installable!
>
Any recommendation here? Aren't we supposed to be all migrating to
pkg-config anyway?
> - get rid of the version in the -dev package names. Eventually think of
> an upgrade path so that your reverse dependencies don't need a
> sourceful upload right now, but can be adjusted according to their
> maintainers' own schedule.
>
-dev should depend on the latest soname,
even though it is very nice that one can actually have two versions
installable at the same time indeed.
> Filing against the “main” (?) library, but while writing the report, I
> realized that the source package might have been a better choice.
>
No prob.
Mind sponsoring the new version?
Regards,
J.L.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
