Re: dh_makeshlibs -V and udebs

Removing -V would be very wrong. Either leave it as-is or make sure it's kept up to date with the highest version from .symbols. 

Cheers, 
Julien 

On December 20, 2017 8:35:18 PM GMT+01:00, Jeremy Bicha <[email protected]> wrote:
>We have several packages that pass the dh_makeshlibs -V flag. Simon
>says he thinks it's not harmful since the symbols file takes
>precedence. I think we should go ahead and remove it then unless it's
>targeting a specific version (like our C++ packages do).
>
>There is one exception: udeb packages. See the below forwarded email.
>
>Thanks,
>Jeremy Bicha
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: Simon McVittie <[email protected]>
>Date: Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 12:55 PM
>Subject: Re: next glib upload
>To: Jeremy Bicha <[email protected]>
>
>On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 at 17:33:36 +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 at 12:07:07 -0500, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
>> > On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Simon McVittie <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>> > > On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 at 08:40:01 -0500, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
>> > > Can you show me some examples of packages waiting for GLib?
>> >
>> > It was a bit easier to show examples before someone thought it was
>> > good idea to upload all of pkg-gnome! ;)
>> >
>> > How about atk1.0 or gtk2-engines or gtk+3.0 or harfbuzz?
>>
>> According to queries like ?source-package(^gtk.3.0$) in aptitude:
>>
>> libatk1.0-0 Depends: libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.49.3) which is older than
>stable.
>...
>> I think this is looking like a bug in the testing migration
>> infrastructure?
>
>Oh... I understand this now, and it isn't a bug in the
>infrastructure. What links atk1.0, gtk2-engines, gtk+3.0 and harfbuzz,
>other than using GLib? Answer: they produce udebs.  Sure enough:
>
>  https://packages.debian.org/unstable/libgtk-3-0-udeb
>dep: libglib2.0-udeb (>= 2.54.2) [not alpha, arm64, hurd-i386, sparc64]
>
>That looks like the result of -V all right.
>
>The symbols file generates nice loose dependencies for ordinary debs,
>but the shlibs file is used to generate dependencies for udebs.
>
>-V is too strict, but too strict is always safe, just annoying (it
>delays migrations). However, the absence of -V is too loose: that tells
>dependent udebs that *literally any version* of GLib is acceptable,
>which is not correct in general. If a new version of GTK uses a symbol
>from a new version of GLib, then GTK must not migrate before GLib: that
>would result in non-functional udebs and a broken debian-installer,
>which I think is built from testing?
>
>I think we should be using -V${version} where ${version} is the newest
>version mentioned in the symbols file (that could probably be automated
>reasonably easily, and arguably dh_shlibdeps should do this itself).
>
>    smcv