On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:50:33PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Package: dpkg-dev > Version: 1.14.14 > Severity: wishlist > User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Usertags: dpkg-gensymbols
> Matthias Klose suggested me to support wildcards in symbols files. The > idea is that the maintainer could then create the symbols files this way: > libc.so.6 libc6 #MINVER# > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.0 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.1 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.1.1 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.2 > [...] > dpkg-gensymbols would still generate full symbols files (with all symbols > listed) but it would take the version from the matching wildcard. > The downside is that when using this facility, dpkg-gensymbols has no way > to detect symbols that have disappeared since previous version. > I find this idea interesting to ease the work on very complex libs that > have sane upstreams (like glibc or some gcc libs) but I'd like to have > the opinion of others too. Perhaps to limit the possibilities of abuse, wildcards should only be supported in symbol names if there's an accompanying symbol version (with no wildcard expansion)? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
