About dpkg-shlibdeps checks
 

On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:39:58AM +0000, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hello,
>
> as announced in
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/09/msg00004.html the
> new dpkg-shlibdeps is stricter in what it accepts and will fail when it
> can't find dependency information for a library that is used by an
> executable or a public library (a public library is defined as a library
> which has a SONAME, see the output of "objdump -p").
>
> Failures look like this:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: No dependency information found for libkdeinit4_kfmclient.so (used by debian/konqueror/usr/bin/kfmclient).
>
> It might also look like this:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: couldn't find library libhpip.so.0 (note: only packages with 'shlibs' files are looked into).
>
> I believe this change is good because it makes sure we don't upload
> packages lacking some important dependency information (see the bug
> #10807 for a simple example...).
>
> But it sure breaks quite a few packages who have "private" libraries with
> a SONAME. I'm willing to add meaningful exceptions to the rule and I just
> implemented two of them (not yet committed, so it's not in 1.14.10
> recently uploaded):
> - when the library is in the same package than the binary analyzed
> - when the library is not versionned and can't have a shlibs file
>
> I think those ought to be enough to avoid many build-failures. In all other
> cases, I believe the right way to fix the failures is to add "shlibs"
> informations even if they are only used between multiple binary packages
> of the same source package. It means that dh_makeshlibs needs to be called
> before dh_shlibdeps of course.
>
> If you know of other good exceptions, please tell me.

does your plan include having a version of the dpkg-shlibdeps that
works in "warning-mode" only so that we can have a more extensive idea
of how the things are going to be, before it stops the development of
the biggest and already hardest packages to maintain out there ?

I mean warning that a new dpkg-shlibdeps is in town is a thing, but
having clues _before_ the storm on how bad the storm will be would be of
help. It's too early to break _everything_ in Debian. Please consider
that plan.

--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org

About dpkg-shlibdeps checks
 

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> does your plan include having a version of the dpkg-shlibdeps that
> works in "warning-mode" only so that we can have a more extensive idea
> of how the things are going to be, before it stops the development of
> the biggest and already hardest packages to maintain out there ?

The --ignore-missing-info flag has been added for this purpose from the
beginning.

> I mean warning that a new dpkg-shlibdeps is in town is a thing, but
> having clues _before_ the storm on how bad the storm will be would be of
> help.

Well, the d-d-a mail included a list of affected packages. So we had a
clue on how many packages are affected. The list has probably evolved
since september but not by much.

Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog

Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

About dpkg-shlibdeps checks
 

On 2007-11-23, Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> wrote:
> Well, the d-d-a mail included a list of affected packages. So we had a
> clue on how many packages are affected. The list has probably evolved
> since september but not by much.

Except covering kde now. KDE didn't change that much since september.

/Sune


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org