Hi Scott On 2022-12-12 22:10:51 -0500, Scott Talbert wrote: > On Mon, 12 Dec 2022, Sam Hartman wrote: > > > > > > > > "Scott" == Scott Talbert <[email protected]> writes: > > > > Scott> Would Option 1, which was "Rebuild wxWidgets and then binNMU > > Scott> all packages that link with libwx_gtk3u_gl library (about a > > Scott> dozen packages)." be acceptable? We could also add > > Scott> appropriate "Breaks" to the library package containing the gl > > Scott> library. > > > > There are times in the past (I'm thinking c++ abi transitions) wher.e > > we've changed the name of the shlibs package but not of the soname. > > So you end up overriding lintian because your shlib package does not > > match the soname exactly. > > You need to update your symbols or shlibs files to depend on the new > > shlibs package name. > > It complicates the Debian packaging a bit, and you probably end up > > carrying the complexity, > > but you don't need to diverge from soname, and if you change build > > options in the future you may need to do it again. > > Would an option like this work for both sides? > > Yes, that's originally what I planned to do, but Olly suggested that > changing the shlib package name without changing the library soname might be > against policy? This approach would be okay with me, though. As an aside, > wx's shlib package names already don't match the soname exactly. (Not sure > of the history there, but they either never have, or haven't for a long > time.)
In this case, changing the package name should be enough. I'd treat it similar to the v5 "transitions" that we had to do with GCC 5 and C++ libraries. What's the status? Time is running short. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
