Re: cross binutils-dev

Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.devel.embedded
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Wookey wrote:
> +++ Jonathan Nieder [2013-01-24 13:58 -0800]:

>> Exactly.  So one fix would be to split out a libbinutils package, with
>> a symbols file making clear that Debian packages are not supposed to
>> link to it.
>
> What does the symbols file contains that makes this clear? Just
> comments, or are there some suitable runes?

Here's what did the trick for me:

	liblzma.so.5 liblzma5 #MINVER#
	| liblzma_private_symbols
	* Build-Depends-Package: liblzma-dev
	 (symver)XZ_5.0 5.1.1alpha+20110809
	 lzma_code@Base 4.999.9beta 1

With that, attempts to use the not-for-Debian symbol lzma_code@Base
produced

	dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: can't parse dependency liblzma_private_symbols
	dpkg-shlibdeps: error: invalid dependency got generated: liblzma5 (>= 5.1.1alpha+20110809), libcomerr2 (>= 1.01), liblzma_private_symbols, libgpg-error0 (>= 1.10), libbz2-1.0, libgcrypt11 (>= 1.4.5), libc6 (>= 2.3.2), liblzo2-2, libuuid1 (>= 2.16), e2fslibs (>= 1.41.99), zlib1g (>= 1:1.1.4), libblkid1 (>= 2.16)

at build time, which was nice.

But nobody except me liked it. :'(  Just requiring a version far in
the future might be less scary.  http://bugs.debian.org/630344 tracks
work on introducing a more proper syntax.

Thanks,
Jonathan
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.