On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 02:07:03PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote: > Enrico Zini wrote:
> > - build -fPIC libraries again (and in that case I'd like to find a > > better way to do it than before[1] > In the long run, libtool could be kicked into doing that sanely. It has > one disadvantage though: New code will not be tested, as the plugins are > still using the old code, and it will be difficult to tell which version > is being run. I don't mind too much about that: at the current state, we can easily track rdepends and be in touch with the maintainers. > > - build a .so and change its name at every upload > Preferable IMO. It makes pretty much clear that this is an unstable API, > but has the disadvantage of requiring rebuilds of all applications that > use it (but this can be fixed by NMUing unchanged source with the > permission of the respective maintainer) More interesting feedback from a #debian-tech[1] conversation on IRC: 14:05 < enrico> I might have a question for this channel re http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debtags-devel/2005-September/000821.html : do we have a proper recommended procedure to handle that case? 14:06 < enrico> I can see two ways: one is creating the -pic library (but there's no direct support on libtool to do that) and the other is changing soname at every upload (putting more load on the ftpmasters) 14:09 < vorlon> enrico: Policy 10.2 allows for creating a special _pic.a lib that's static but PIC. 14:18 < enrico> vorlon: is there an explicit note about it? I couldn't find it 14:20 < vorlon> hmm... I can't find one 14:21 < vorlon> but see xlibs-static-pic for an example of a package that's done this for years 14:21 < enrico> vorlon: ok, thanks 14:22 < vorlon> sure 14:22 < vorlon> so I guess the answer is, policy doesn't actually allow it, but Policy is wrong. :) 14:22 * enrico is depressed at the burden of going back to make the -pic, but at least now I have a couple comaintainers 14:22 < vorlon> why was the pic dropped? 14:23 < enrico> vorlon: because I wrongly understood it was only a performance issue and I could do without > >The good news this time is that I'm not alone anymore in solving this > >mess and we can work it out in a team. What do you think of this > >situation? > Not sanely solvable until my autobuilder project is finished and/or > packages that are uninstallable but buildable are automatically rebuilt. Gah, uhm... so let's stay in the sanely solvable and let's solve it in the less possible insane way :) So far I could be happy with the -pic thing, especially if you have more libtool know-how than me to get this done in a saner way. Ciao, Enrico [1] http://people.debian.org/~ajt/CHARTER.debian-tech -- GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Debtags-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/debtags-devel
