FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-05-2008, 07:14 AM
Paul Wise
 
Default shlibs vs symbols?

Hi all,

I was reviewing a library package RFS (libthai) and I noticed that the
shlibs pointed at version X and all the symbols in the symbols file
pointed at an earlier version. Here I assume that the shlibs should be
changed to point to the earlier version?

Then I had a look at the 26 (out of ~5944) library packages on my system
using symbols and found similar things:

libffi4: shlibs 4.3, symbols max 4.2.1
libaa1: shlibs 1.2, symbols all 1.4p5
libgomp1: shlibs 4.3, symbols max 4.2.1
libgpewidget1: shlibs no version, symbols max 0.115 min 0.88
libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0: shlibs 0.10.17, symbols max 0.10.16
libgstreamer0.10-0: same as ^^
libgtkspell0: shlibs 2.0.2, symbols all 2.0.10
libogg0: shlibs 1.1.3, symbols max 1.1.0, 2 removed symbols
libqof-backend-qsf0: shlibs no version, symbols all 0.7.3, changelog goes way back
libqof1: shlibs no version, symbols all 0.7.2, changelog goes way back
libtheora0: shlibs no version, symbols min 0.0.0.alpha7.dfsg-1.1 max 1.0~beta1-1
libvorbisenc2: shlibs 1.2.0.dfsg, symbols all 1.1.2

Am I correct in thinking that either the shlibs or the symbols for some
of these are wrong?

If so, I guess I should file wishlist bugs for lintian tests for some of
these situations? Like shlibs too cautious, shlibs too relaxed, symbols
not produced from enough versions.

Also, does mole use packages from oldstable or the morgue or
snapshot.d.n to create the symbols file it distributes?

--
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
 
Old 02-05-2008, 07:37 AM
Raphael Hertzog
 
Default shlibs vs symbols?

Hi,

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008, Paul Wise wrote:
> I was reviewing a library package RFS (libthai) and I noticed that the
> shlibs pointed at version X and all the symbols in the symbols file
> pointed at an earlier version. Here I assume that the shlibs should be
> changed to point to the earlier version?

No. It's quite common for maintainers to use dh_makeshlibs -V and always
generate a dependency on the latest upstream version. The dependency is
too strong most of the times, but's it's not a bug. Furthermore, if they
have a symbols file, it's even less important since the information from
symbols files take precedence.

> libaa1: shlibs 1.2, symbols all 1.4p5

Given that 1.4p5 is the version in oldstable too, this doesn't change
anything.

> libgpewidget1: shlibs no version, symbols max 0.115 min 0.88
> libtheora0: shlibs no version, symbols min 0.0.0.alpha7.dfsg-1.1 max 1.0~beta1-1

Here one could argue that the shlibs file is broken since >= 0.115 ought
to be used in the shlibs (since some symbols have been introduced by
0.115). Same for libtheora.

> libgtkspell0: shlibs 2.0.2, symbols all 2.0.10

2.0.10 is in oldtsbale => non-issue

> libogg0: shlibs 1.1.3, symbols max 1.1.0, 2 removed symbols

Removed symbols ought to be stripped by the maintainers in the symbols
files that they provide...

> libqof-backend-qsf0: shlibs no version, symbols all 0.7.3, changelog goes way back
> libqof1: shlibs no version, symbols all 0.7.2, changelog goes way back

Strange, stable has 0.7.1... and lack of version in shlibs is probably a
bug, but one that can't be triggered except by building on etch with a
dpkg-dev that doesn't support symbols files yet.

> Am I correct in thinking that either the shlibs or the symbols for some
> of these are wrong?

In theory yes, in practice it's useless to require both to be in sync.
What's important is that symbols files match reality.

And symbols file can have too high versions, it doesn't hurt much when the
given version is already in oldstable/stable.

> If so, I guess I should file wishlist bugs for lintian tests for some of
> these situations? Like shlibs too cautious, shlibs too relaxed, symbols
> not produced from enough versions.

IMO this is a bad idea. There's no requirement that symbols files include
history up to oldstable... and like I said, shlibs are no more used when
you have symbols files, so a too-strong shlibs is ok given that it's only
used in the rare cases when an old dpkg-dev is used (backports).

> Also, does mole use packages from oldstable or the morgue or
> snapshot.d.n to create the symbols file it distributes?

No.

Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog

Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
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
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:57 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org