On 2011-08-11 Stefan Bühler <[email protected]> wrote:
> Package: gnutls26
> Version: 2.12.7-4
> Manual breaks are the wrong way imho - they only protect "known"
> dependencies.
We do know the packages in Debian that break. I have checked.
> Imho the gnutls library itself needs a so bump - you should never
> change the interface provided by a library packages, and this
> includes reomving libs.
The main gnutls API did not break. The fact thhat I ahve shipped two
librariers in a single package does nor change this.
There is also a question of scale. 4 packages in Debian use the
openssl wrapper, 200 use gnutls proper.
ametzler@argenau:~$ grep-available -FDepends -sPackage \
libgnutls26 \ | wc
202 404 4355
On top of that there is no reason for upstream to change the man
gnults soname. It did not break. There is already another new gnutls
stable release (3.0.0), it does break the API/ABI and includes a
soname bump.
Please also note that I have asked on Debian release ages ago whether
handling the transition the way I did was ok, or whether they had
better ideas.
cu andreas
--
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
