Re: complex versioning scenario

[Steffen Sledz <sledz@dresearch-fe.de>]

On 07.04.2014 16:49, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 15:22 +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>> On 07.04.2014 14:37, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> On 25.03.2014 16:03, Mark Hatle wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> If the package 'requiring libfoo' has a DEPENDS += ... in it.. then yes, it should have been rebuilt when the libfoo was rebuilt.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately i can't confirm that.  :(
>>>
>>> part of the real app recipe:
>>> ------------> snip <-------------
>>> DEPENDS = "vala-native libdrtrace libdrhip libdrbcc jansson"
>>> RDEPENDS_${PN} = "dropmodes"
>>> ------------> snap <-------------
>>>
>>> part of the real resulting opkg control file for this app:
>>> ------------> snip <-------------
>>> Depends: dropmodes, libglib-2.0-0 (>= 2.36.4), libdrhip1 (>= gitr27+42af787eb2), libjansson4 (>= 2.4), libc6 (>= 2.18)
>>> ------------> snap <-------------
>>>
>>> I miss the runtime dependencies for libdrtrace and libdrbcc. Where are they gone?
>>
>> Some additional info:
>> ------------> snip <-------------
>> # objdump -p ./package/usr/lib/libdrhip.so.1.0.0
>>
>> ./package/usr/lib/libdrhip.so.1.0.0:     file format elf32-littlearm
>> ...
>> Dynamic Section:
>>   NEEDED               libc.so.6
>>   SONAME               libdrhip.so.1
>> ...
>>
>> # objdump -p ./package/usr/lib/libdrbcc.so.1.0.0
>>
>> ./package/usr/lib/libdrbcc.so.1.0.0:     file format elf32-littlearm
>> ...
>> Dynamic Section:
>>   NEEDED               libdrtrace.so.0
>>   NEEDED               libm.so.6
>>   NEEDED               libreadline.so.6
>>   NEEDED               libpthread.so.0
>>   NEEDED               libc.so.6
>>   SONAME               libdrbcc.so.1
>> ...
>>
>> # objdump -p ./package/usr/bin/drbccproxy
>>
>> ./package/usr/bin/drbccproxy:     file format elf32-littlearm
>> ...
>> Dynamic Section:
>>   NEEDED               libdrhip.so.1
>>   NEEDED               libdrbcc.so.0
>>   NEEDED               libdrtrace.so.0
>>   NEEDED               libgio-2.0.so.0
>>   NEEDED               libgobject-2.0.so.0
>>   NEEDED               libglib-2.0.so.0
>>   NEEDED               libjansson.so.4
>>   NEEDED               librt.so.1
>>   NEEDED               libpthread.so.0
>>   NEEDED               libc.so.6
>> ...
>> ------------> snap <-------------
>>
>> So it seems the data objdump shows are OK.
>>
>> E.g. the app drbccproxy really has a dependency to a libdrbcc. But this is not refelected in the control file.
> 
> At this point you'll probably have to look at the shlibs code in
> package.bbclass and see why its not picking up the shlib dependencies
> correctly for the packages...
> 
> It does appear there is some problem there but its hard to saw what
> without a test case to reproduce.

I could isolate the problem. :)

If a package contains a shared library *and* a binary (e.g. a related command line tool) then the soname major version *is not appended* to the package name (see debian_package_name_hook in debian.bbclass). All other problems are aftereffects.

Is this an intended behaviour? There should be a big fat warning if this is the case.

Or is it a bug?

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058