Hi Dmitry,

Thanks for your feedback!

Den 2017-05-27 kl. 20:55, skrev Dmitry Shachnev:

The current Qt 4 package has no reverse dependencies, so you can safely drop
it and replace with the Qt 5 package.

I would prefer to avoid conflict, so please use /usr/include/PythonQt5.

Yes, that sounds reasonable.

I think it is better to use original upstream sonames, for compatibility with
third-party applications built against upstream versions.

The Debian package name should usually be based only on the major part of
soname, but as there is a clear ABI break here for Qt 5 switch, I think you
may keep the current naming scheme and name the package libpythonqt3.1.

Isn't an argument for renamed .so files that this breaking ABI change would require the major version to change? I built an application against PythonQt today, and it was linked against libPythonQt.so.3, so it obviously cared about the major version. For that reason I patched the project files to produce the targets libPythonQt5.so.3.1.0 etc. The package could then be called libpythonqt-qt5-3. The problem is as you say that the project by default doesn't name the Qt 5 libraries differently. Maybe something that I should try to get fixed upstream?

I do not know why .so.3 should be skipped, I would add it.

Yes, that's also the easiest solution from a technical standpoint as I see it.



Reply via email to