|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > July 2005 > API/ABI in -dev package name?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
API/ABI in -dev package name?
|
|
| Junichi Uekawa 2005-07-15, 6:06 pm |
| > > > > libfoobar-2.1-0 will have
>
> Exactly!  We must have a seperate tracking of API and ABI changes.
> To do otherwise is madness.
Hmm... I don't think Debian -dev package and
shared library packages really reflect what we consider to be
ABI/API.
Nothing documented about that, and it's not really done in practice.
Currently people just package libwhatever-dev and break API whenever they
please.
regards,
junichi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Philipp Kern 2005-07-15, 6:06 pm |
| On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 22:33 +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Currently people just package libwhatever-dev and break API whenever they
> please.
That's an upstream issue more or less. With libtoolised packages
-release has to be used if the API breaks in a non backwards-compatible
way. This would also be encoded in the dev-package's name.
Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Stephen Frost 2005-07-15, 6:06 pm |
| * Junichi Uekawa (dancer@netfort.gr.jp) wrote:
>
> Hmm... I don't think Debian -dev package and
> shared library packages really reflect what we consider to be
> ABI/API.
>
> Nothing documented about that, and it's not really done in practice.
>
> Currently people just package libwhatever-dev and break API whenever they
> please.
Eh? It *is* done in practice, look at my other email wrt glib. Some
upstreams are actually quite good about their APIs and just don't ever
break it in a backwards-incompatible way. In those cases
'libwhatever-dev' is perfectly fine. Regardless, what you're suggesting
is probably done *less* in practice, so that argument certainly doesn't
hold.
Thanks,
Stephen
| |
| Steve Langasek 2005-07-15, 6:06 pm |
| On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 04:02:48PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 22:33 +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> That's an upstream issue more or less. With libtoolised packages
> -release has to be used if the API breaks in a non backwards-compatible
> way.
Not consistently. Indeed, I've never heard of such a practice; can you give
an example?
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Philipp Kern 2005-07-15, 6:06 pm |
| On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 09:14 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Not consistently. Indeed, I've never heard of such a practice; can you give
> an example?
Well in fact I saw quite some projects doing it that way and found it to
be the cleanest. gtk(mm) and glib(mm) come to my mind if I recall it
correctly. They change -release as soon as the API breaks.
Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|