[Debtags-devel] Re: First packaging issue for the new
comaintainance team
Simon Richter
sjr at debian.org
Mon Sep 12 12:07:03 UTC 2005
Hi,
Enrico Zini wrote:
> Later on it appeared that the -pic libraries were non-needed, at the
> cost of a bigger loading time and memory footprint because of textrels.
Well, that is only true for i386 and probably some other ports that can
deal with it.
> Policy 10.2:
> The shared version of a library must be compiled with -fPIC, and the
> static version must not be. In other words, each source unit (*.c, for
> example, for C files) will need to be compiled twice.
Hrm, this is for libraries with a stable API/ABI however. We already
break that if we do not provide shared libs, and it has been commonly
accepted practice.
> - 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.
> - 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)
> 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.
Simon
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 307 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debtags-devel/attachments/20050912/1b3e2d74/signature.pgp
More information about the Debtags-devel
mailing list