Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 01:20:33PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > With debhelper 5.0.61, dh_makeshlibs will also call dpkg-gensymbols if it > > finds debian/.symbols (or debian/.symbols.). So > > for packages using debhelper, the only thing to do is to drop the right > > symbo

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

* Joey Hess: >> Performance penalty of PIC code due to register pressure, I guess. > > I seem to remember it was a threading issue, but I didn't manage to > track down an explanation. Well, Perl should use __thread anyway, so it's unlikely that the issue is still present. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, em

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Raphael Hertzog wrote: > And shlibs files are ignored if dpkg-shlibdeps is able to find > symbols files. Ah, that wasn't clear, I must have missed that in the documentation. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Mike Hommey wrote: > > FWIW, I'm testing this on libxml2. I'd have some remarks: > > - The .symbols file in /var/lib/dpkg/info is bigger than all the other > > maintainer files there for libxml2. If a significan

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Joey Hess wrote: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > Given that shlibs are still used as fallback, I don't see a reason to > > remove -V, in particular given that unofficial archs might not have > > symbols files when they are arch-specific and when something specific > > needs to be

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Florian Weimer wrote: > * Russ Allbery: > > >> As I understand it, this is only the case on i386 - on other arches, > >> /usr/bin/perl links to libperl, although the modules don't. > > > > ...indeed. That's bizarre. Why is i386 different than all the other > > platforms? > > Performance penalty

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Given that shlibs are still used as fallback, I don't see a reason to > remove -V, in particular given that unofficial archs might not have > symbols files when they are arch-specific and when something specific > needs to be done to add support for a new arch. I thought t

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

This one time, at band camp, Florian Weimer said: > * Russ Allbery: > > >> As I understand it, this is only the case on i386 - on other arches, > >> /usr/bin/perl links to libperl, although the modules don't. > > > > ...indeed. That's bizarre. Why is i386 different than all the other > > platfor

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

* Russ Allbery: >> As I understand it, this is only the case on i386 - on other arches, >> /usr/bin/perl links to libperl, although the modules don't. > > ...indeed. That's bizarre. Why is i386 different than all the other > platforms? Performance penalty of PIC code due to register pressure, I

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Aren't they supposed to have a prototype to avoid such behaviour? Ah, indeed. I had forgotten about that. You're entirely correct. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMA

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Russ Allbery wrote: > Be careful about && because you can get the opposite problem. > > exists $self->{flags}{DYNAMIC && $self->{flags}{DYNAMIC} > > will be parsed as > > exists ($self->{flags}{DYNAMIC && $self->{flags}{DYNAMIC}) > > It's often good style to always

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Mike Hommey wrote: > FWIW, I'm testing this on libxml2. I'd have some remarks: > - The .symbols file in /var/lib/dpkg/info is bigger than all the other > maintainer files there for libxml2. If a significant amount of packages > implement this, it can start to make a difference.

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This change was precisely meant to silence those warnings. But it looks > like this line is problematic: > return exists $self->{flags}{DYNAMIC} and $self->{flags}{DYNAMIC} > and exists $self->{SONAME} and $self->{SONAME}; > > It's parsed as: >

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Russ Allbery wrote: >I always use dependencies like >= 2.10 in shlibs files rather than the >more specific 2.10-1 because of this problem. I'm not sure if that's >the right general solution, but people who start from the seed files >should at least consider rem

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 04:22:56PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hello, > > since the upload of dpkg 1.14.8 to unstable, it's now possible for > library packages to generate "symbols" control files that will be used by > other packages to get more accurate (and less strict) dependencies. > > As

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Mike Hommey wrote: > Are the @Base in these files really necessary ? With the current code, IIRC yes. > I mean, most packages have no symbol versioning and thus use the "Base" > version. Does it work without it being explicitly put ? Probably not. > If not, don't you think

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Joey Hess wrote: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > With debhelper 5.0.61, dh_makeshlibs will also call dpkg-gensymbols if it > > finds debian/.symbols (or debian/.symbols.). So > > for packages using debhelper, the only thing to do is to drop the right > > symbol file(s) at the righ

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This one time, at band camp, Russ Allbery said: >> Oh, right, that's the problem. /usr/bin/perl doesn't use libperl >> itself and instead just exports the same symbols to any modules it >> loads. So if the module is linked with libperl, when the module

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Integrated documentation > > The existing documentation is integrated in various dpkg manual pages: > - dpkg-gensymbols(1) > - dpkg-shlibdeps(1) > - deb-symbols(5) In case anyone would like to do some minor coding around this,

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

This one time, at band camp, Russ Allbery said: > Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > This one time, at band camp, Russ Allbery said: > > >> * The new warnings from the dpkg-* tools warn about any binary Perl > >>module because all binary Perl modules use symbols from Perl itself but

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This one time, at band camp, Russ Allbery said: >> * The new warnings from the dpkg-* tools warn about any binary Perl >>module because all binary Perl modules use symbols from Perl itself but >>traditionally aren't linked directly against libper

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

This one time, at band camp, Russ Allbery said: > * The new warnings from the dpkg-* tools warn about any binary Perl >module because all binary Perl modules use symbols from Perl itself but >traditionally aren't linked directly against libperl. (There was some >reason for this that I

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > since the upload of dpkg 1.14.8 to unstable, it's now possible for > library packages to generate "symbols" control files that will be used > by other packages to get more accurate (and less strict) dependencies. > As this is a far reaching change, I'

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 10:05:41PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 01:20:33PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > With debhelper 5.0.61, dh_makeshlibs will also call dpkg-gensymbols if it > > > finds debian/.symbols (or debian/.symbols.). So > > > for packag

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 04:22:56PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Some pre-generated symbols files can be downloaded on > http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/mole/seedsymbols/ > > Beware, those files have been auto-generated and should be verified by the > maintainer (check that the version are correct,

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello, > > since the upload of dpkg 1.14.8 to unstable, it's now possible for > library packages to generate "symbols" control files that will be used > by other packages to get more accurate (and less strict) dependencies. > > As this is a far reachin

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 01:20:33PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > With debhelper 5.0.61, dh_makeshlibs will also call dpkg-gensymbols if it > > finds debian/.symbols (or debian/.symbols.). So > > for packages using debhelper, the only thing to do is to drop the right > > symbo

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Joey Hess wrote: > I also thought about using symbol files for the not very shared > libraries in the fbreader source package, but there's C++ symbol > mangling going on, so I think I can't. You can, but it generally means having to handle arch-specific symbols files because s

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Raphael Hertzog wrote: > With debhelper 5.0.61, dh_makeshlibs will also call dpkg-gensymbols if it > finds debian/.symbols (or debian/.symbols.). So > for packages using debhelper, the only thing to do is to drop the right > symbol file(s) at the right place and add build-depends on dpkg-dev (>= >

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

So FWIW, I have aalib using a symbol file, it's what I used to test the debhelper modifications. Haven't uploaded it yet because it will have to build-depend on the recent dpkg bugfix. Also because dpkg-shlibdeps is now smart enough to complain about some unnecessary linkages to things like libm an

Re: Early adopters of symbol based dependencies needed

Le mardi 20 novembre 2007 à 16:22 +0100, Raphael Hertzog a écrit : > 2/ Watch out if adding support of symbols files break unofficial > architectures (like armel or kfreebsd-i386/amd64). Because the > pre-generated files only take into account the current list of official > architectures, so you mi