On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 05:18, Adrian Knoth <a...@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de> wrote:
> On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 05:06:24PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>> > Given the tons of C++ symbols in jackd2, I'd also suggest to make the
>> > jackd1 package the official dev package and also the "donator" of the
>> > symbols file.
>> I'm quite confused by this. AFAIK, jack is a pure C API, so C++
>> symbols have no place in there.
> Yep. But jackd2 is implemented in C++, and these symbols somehow are
> public or leak into the symbols file (also with -fvisibility=hidden).

These symbols are being explicitly exported (check the header files). See below.

>> However, I understood from the last discussion that those are not
>> really bogus, but are some sort of internal (server-lib) API, which is
>> not allowed to be used by regular clients. Is this correct?
> Exactly.

The symbols cannot then be hidden (otherwise the server will not find
them). So they will be a noise factor _forever_. I'm wondering if this
is a correct design decision (having a single library for both a
public and a private API), but it's not my call to make. I think we
should trust upstream and just shove a libjack0.shlibs with >=0.116,
and be done with it.


Felipe Sateler

pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to