Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6 - Debian

This is a discussion on Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6 - Debian ; * Josselin Mouette [Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:59:33 +0200]: > Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 * 13:37 +0100, Adeodato Simó a écrit : > > OR > > * introduce a ncurses5 source package. Then not all 400 packages need ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 55

Thread: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

  1. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    * Josselin Mouette [Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:59:33 +0200]:

    > Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 * 13:37 +0100, Adeodato Simó a écrit :
    > > OR


    > > * introduce a ncurses5 source package. Then not all 400 packages need
    > > to go into testing at the same time, they just can trickle as they
    > > get built. This would be very good, *and* we'd work together with
    > > you to ensure such source package disappears before Squeeze (we'd
    > > w-b massage, you'd file bugs for FTBFS, and NMU as necessary). (¹)


    > Given that symbols in libncurses are not versioned, this looks like a
    > very dangerous thing to do. Even in other cases, you’re probably going
    > to run into crasher bugs in unstable, unless libncurses6 is made to
    > conflict with all libraries depending on libncurses5.


    Meh, I forgot we have libraries linking against ncurses (of course,
    silly me).

    The worrysome bit are not the crashes on unstable, but them propagating
    to testing. Even if we'd rebuild all libraries first, and then their
    rev-deps that depend on ncurses as well, there's no easy way to ensure
    that'd transition to testing together.

    Merde.

    --
    Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
    Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org

    He who has not a good memory should never take upon himself the trade of lying.
    -- Michel de Montaigne


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  2. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 04:09:27PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
    > Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 16:05 +0200, Josselin Mouette a crit :
    > > Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 11:03 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
    > > a crit :
    > > > It is probably enough to version symbols in the new soname packages

    > >
    > > No.

    >
    > Before anyone asks why: when you require a symbol without a version, the
    > dynamic linker will pick any of those it finds in the dependent
    > libraries. Which means it can pick the correct (unversioned) one as well
    > as the versioned one.


    Mabye it would work if we'd add symbols to the current ncurses, rebuild
    everything, then introduce the new one with the new symbols?


    Michael


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  3. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 05:20:22PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
    > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 04:09:27PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
    > > Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 16:05 +0200, Josselin Mouette a crit :
    > > > Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 11:03 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
    > > > a crit :
    > > > > It is probably enough to version symbols in the new soname packages


    > > > No.


    > > Before anyone asks why: when you require a symbol without a version, the
    > > dynamic linker will pick any of those it finds in the dependent
    > > libraries. Which means it can pick the correct (unversioned) one as well
    > > as the versioned one.


    > Mabye it would work if we'd add symbols to the current ncurses, rebuild
    > everything, then introduce the new one with the new symbols?


    Unless we do this step /before/ the release of lenny, there will still be
    issues on partial upgrades from lenny to squeeze, so it really depends on
    how thorough you want to be here.

    --
    Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
    Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
    Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
    slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  4. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 09:01 -0700, Steve Langasek a crit :
    > > Mabye it would work if we'd add symbols to the current ncurses, rebuild
    > > everything, then introduce the new one with the new symbols?

    >
    > Unless we do this step /before/ the release of lenny, there will still be
    > issues on partial upgrades from lenny to squeeze, so it really depends on
    > how thorough you want to be here.


    Yes, but that could be worked around by making libncurses6 conflict with
    libncurses5 (<< version.with.symbols).

    --
    .''`.
    : :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
    `. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
    `- our own. Resistance is futile.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQBI0SwprSla4ddfhTMRAlPVAKClyIiO0SmuTyJP+tKaV3 WxyNF//gCePjDv
    S4HXyasf8Fq8dpc8yq656Q4=
    =e4xg
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  5. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6


    [Josselin Mouette]
    > Yes, but that could be worked around by making libncurses6 conflict with
    > libncurses5 (<< version.with.symbols).


    That only works if you rebuild everything that uses ncurses5 so the
    symbol _users_ know they are supposed to require versions. (And, like
    any proposal involving Debian-specific symbol versioning, it still
    doesn't allow non-Debian binaries to run safely.)
    --
    Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  6. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 19:52 -0500, Peter Samuelson a crit :
    > [Josselin Mouette]
    > > Yes, but that could be worked around by making libncurses6 conflict with
    > > libncurses5 (<< version.with.symbols).

    >
    > That only works if you rebuild everything that uses ncurses5 so the
    > symbol _users_ know they are supposed to require versions.


    Yes, you need to rebuild everything and to bump shlibs.

    > (And, like
    > any proposal involving Debian-specific symbol versioning, it still
    > doesn't allow non-Debian binaries to run safely.)


    If a non-Debian binary links to only libncurses.so.5, it will run
    safely, maybe with a warning. If it links to both libncurses.so.5 and
    another library that we have rebuilt against libncurses.so.6, it will
    fail.

    --
    .''`.
    : :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
    `. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
    `- our own. Resistance is futile.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQBI0hK8rSla4ddfhTMRAvCqAJ9vIOCEB7PSg0VsRVBf10 57pWoW+ACfTybD
    lmQw+NGiUu5OwKiyZT9n324=
    =zksB
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  7. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    On Thu, 18 Sep 2008, Josselin Mouette wrote:
    > Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 19:52 -0500, Peter Samuelson a crit :
    > > [Josselin Mouette]
    > > > Yes, but that could be worked around by making libncurses6 conflict with
    > > > libncurses5 (<< version.with.symbols).

    > >
    > > That only works if you rebuild everything that uses ncurses5 so the
    > > symbol _users_ know they are supposed to require versions.

    >
    > Yes, you need to rebuild everything and to bump shlibs.
    >
    > > (And, like
    > > any proposal involving Debian-specific symbol versioning, it still
    > > doesn't allow non-Debian binaries to run safely.)

    >
    > If a non-Debian binary links to only libncurses.so.5, it will run
    > safely, maybe with a warning. If it links to both libncurses.so.5 and
    > another library that we have rebuilt against libncurses.so.6, it will
    > fail.


    .... which is MUCH better than the kind of subtle bug you would get without
    symbol versioning.

    Still, if we can add the version scripts [in experimental!] and ship it
    upstream ASAP so that ncurses gets such symbols at least for Linux right
    away, that would be MUCH better.

    --
    "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
    them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
    where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
    Henrique Holschuh


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  8. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:22:07AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
    > * Daniel Baumann:
    >
    > > Steve Langasek wrote:
    > >> In that case: no, please fix your ncurses 6 package to provide a proper
    > >> transition path by adding Provides: libncurses5-dev.

    > >
    > > that won't work in all cases, the soname major changes for a reason.

    >
    > And which is that? I thought the ncurses ABI was pretty fixed. It's
    > also part of LSB, isn't it?


    Indeed, what would this imply for our LSB compatibility?

    http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org...ibncurses.html

    seems to say libncurses.so.5 is the required one, will we lose LSB
    compatibility if we start shipping libncurses.so.6 instead?

    CCing debian-lsb.


    Michael


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  9. Is this another headsup: lenny+1=squeeze

    On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 09:01:21AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
    > > Mabye it would work if we'd add symbols to the current ncurses, rebuild
    > > everything, then introduce the new one with the new symbols?

    >
    > Unless we do this step /before/ the release of lenny, there will still be
    > issues on partial upgrades from lenny to squeeze, so it really depends on
    > how thorough you want to be here.



    Hmmm... lenny+1=squeeze ????

    This is my first sighting :-)

    Osamu


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  10. Re: Is this another headsup: lenny+1=squeeze

    On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:20:16 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:

    > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 09:01:21AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
    > > > Mabye it would work if we'd add symbols to the current ncurses, rebuild
    > > > everything, then introduce the new one with the new symbols?

    > >
    > > Unless we do this step /before/ the release of lenny, there will still be
    > > issues on partial upgrades from lenny to squeeze, so it really depends on
    > > how thorough you want to be here.

    >
    > Hmmm... lenny+1=squeeze ????
    >
    > This is my first sighting :-)


    Err.. that's old now

    http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel.../msg00000.html

    Release name
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~
    We will continue to use Toy Story character names for lenny's successor,
    which will be called ``squeeze'' (three-eyed space alien).


    Kindly,
    David

    --
    . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
    : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
    `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
    `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkjSWboACgkQ5qqQFxOSsXRK6QCePtYQbuA8VF L360xbH/m81LVb
    OTUAn2Q+ObN+c69UzsmrHcY7yuaUH3JW
    =ENU/
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  11. Re: Is this another headsup: lenny+1=squeeze

    Hi,

    On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 15:20, Osamu Aoki wrote:
    > Hmmm... lenny+1=squeeze ????


    yeah, it was announched by Luk at here[1].

    Cheers,
    Sandro

    [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel.../msg00000.html

    --
    Sandro Tosi (aka morph, Morpheus, matrixhasu)
    My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
    Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  12. Re: Is this another headsup: lenny+1=squeeze

    Hi!

    Osamu Aoki schrieb:

    > Hmmm... lenny+1=squeeze ????
    >
    > This is my first sighting :-)


    Sometimes it's worth to read these "Release update" mails comming in
    till the end:
    http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel.../msg00000.html


    Best regards,
    Alexander


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  13. Re: Is this another headsup: lenny+1=squeeze

    Osamu Aoki writes:

    > Hmmm... lenny+1=squeeze ????
    >
    > This is my first sighting :-)


    In Message-Id: <48BB8539.7060401@debian.org>, posted 2008-09-01:

    We are happy to publish yet another issue of our highly successful
    motivational status updates. This month's issue contains, as
    reward for your continued interest, the name for lenny's
    successor.
    […]



    Apparently your interest was not continued enough :-)

    --
    \ “Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?” “Uh, I think so, |
    `\ Brain, but we'll never get a monkey to use dental floss.” |
    _o__) —_Pinky and The Brain_ |
    Ben Finney


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  14. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 14:39 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
    > Indeed, what would this imply for our LSB compatibility?
    >
    > http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org...ibncurses.html
    >
    > seems to say libncurses.so.5 is the required one, will we lose LSB
    > compatibility if we start shipping libncurses.so.6 instead?


    Upstream is doing that change; ncurses can't be forever stalled because
    of LSB, you see. So, as far as I know, what will be needed is for the
    LSB to be updated, at some point, and while this isn't done, and perhaps
    for some time after that, distributions will need to keep on shipping
    libncurses.so.5 along with .so.6, when LSB compatibility is needed.

    See you,

    --
    Gustavo Noronha Silva
    Debian Project

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iQEcBAABAgAGBQJI0m11AAoJENIA6zCg+12mauMIAIPsLhjf8O Lxft21eXFU8a8A
    fArL4kXxMnfgMNQlolYxTXU2/z6fh+lGJI7ntqpZlYZg9q4U0qYuRSP99g7Ehyes
    Uxi/asL4Xthir3jNA0RfGrSlHxWDXOXGoC7ITQkK1CxQW561ohq/B9mkkqWVwjd/
    Bw+vA/ERuWFOjVl7rcd7jMnwv3tRecXGzrzRfoBaQAL2QQYRae4pQgxL qoFdXtxP
    ILmQK+dm13I636sc/fygnZ/uWmmgFSLAtJbQIy6ebjsKLbj5aQ5HZgyAEfx9JREA
    ZgFbakarXFHnZG5lhnsIdUFvs05JSNcVWkAv/JLX9cXOC9F18hCihS/o/RM95TI=
    =0hQ/
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  15. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:02:14PM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
    > On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 14:39 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
    > > Indeed, what would this imply for our LSB compatibility?
    > >
    > > http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org...ibncurses.html
    > >
    > > seems to say libncurses.so.5 is the required one, will we lose LSB
    > > compatibility if we start shipping libncurses.so.6 instead?

    >
    > Upstream is doing that change; ncurses can't be forever stalled because
    > of LSB, you see.


    As I understand it, upstream simply mandates either libncurses.so.5 or
    libncurses.so.6 based on the configure flags for enabling mouse-wheel
    support. The Debian maintainer has decided to add those flags
    post-lenny, thus changing the soname.


    Michael


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  16. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    Michael Banck writes:

    >> Upstream is doing that change; ncurses can't be forever stalled because
    >> of LSB, you see.

    >
    > As I understand it, upstream simply mandates either libncurses.so.5 or
    > libncurses.so.6 based on the configure flags for enabling mouse-wheel
    > support. The Debian maintainer has decided to add those flags
    > post-lenny, thus changing the soname.


    So the obvious solution seems to me then to build ncurses twice,
    providing both libncurses5 and libncurses6 packages. What point do I miss?

    --
    Gruesse/greetings,
    Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  17. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 17:20:54 +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:

    > So the obvious solution seems to me then to build ncurses twice,
    > providing both libncurses5 and libncurses6 packages. What point do I miss?
    >

    The crashes that will happen when both are loaded in a process's address
    space.

    Cheers,
    Julien


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  18. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 05:07:01PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
    > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:02:14PM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
    > > On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 14:39 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
    > > > Indeed, what would this imply for our LSB compatibility?
    > > >
    > > > http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org...ibncurses.html
    > > >
    > > > seems to say libncurses.so.5 is the required one, will we lose LSB
    > > > compatibility if we start shipping libncurses.so.6 instead?

    > >
    > > Upstream is doing that change; ncurses can't be forever stalled because
    > > of LSB, you see.

    >
    > As I understand it, upstream simply mandates either libncurses.so.5 or
    > libncurses.so.6 based on the configure flags for enabling mouse-wheel
    > support. The Debian maintainer has decided to add those flags
    > post-lenny, thus changing the soname.


    .... and they couldn't add mouse-wheel support without breaking ABI ?

    Mike


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  19. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    * Mike Hommey:

    > ... and they couldn't add mouse-wheel support without breaking ABI ?


    AFAICT, the issue is that there aren't enough bits in an int to express
    all the button events in the same way as before. The new ABI reshuffles
    the bits to make more room.

    It should be possible to make this change in a less invasive way.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  20. Re: Headsup: ncurses soname bump 5 to 6

    Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
    > On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 14:39 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
    >
    >> Indeed, what would this imply for our LSB compatibility?
    >>
    >> http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org...ibncurses.html
    >>
    >> seems to say libncurses.so.5 is the required one, will we lose LSB
    >> compatibility if we start shipping libncurses.so.6 instead?
    >>

    >
    > Upstream is doing that change; ncurses can't be forever stalled because
    > of LSB, you see. So, as far as I know, what will be needed is for the
    > LSB to be updated, at some point, and while this isn't done, and perhaps
    > for some time after that, distributions will need to keep on shipping
    > libncurses.so.5 along with .so.6, when LSB compatibility is needed.


    LSB will follow what upstream is doing once it's widespread in distros.
    Hopefully
    they'll all make the same choice, or we will have a problem. The need
    for .so.5 won't
    go away since there's always a backward compatibility requirement, but
    normally
    bumping the so-version means they can coexist. Julien is suggesting
    this is not so?
    Does one ever have multiple curses programs managing the same screen
    concurrently?
    Don't even think that makes sense.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast