Project

General

Profile

Actions

Bug #6413

open

Incorrect Debian/Debian-like binary packages

Added by FFY00 29 days ago. Updated 28 days ago.

Status:
New
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Target version:
-
Start date:
03/22/2024
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Spec Reference:

Description

Hi,

It seems the binary packages for Debian and Debian-like distributions, such as Ubuntu, for librtlsdr are incorrect.

You are shipping a librtlsdr0 package for 2.x version, which has a SO version with a major of 2. The correct package should be librtlsdr2. Not shipping a .so.0 in a librtlsdr0 package means that all software that was built against it will now result in an unresolved linker dependency.

With that said, I would also recommend the SO version to not be tied to the project version, as that would require all existing packages to be rebuilt against the new library package, even if there weren't any ABI changes. I don't know if there were any ABI changes between .so.0 and .so.2, but if there weren't, I would recommend for rtl-sdr 2.x to still ship a SO with a 0 major version (in this case, also a .so.2 now, since version 2.x has already been released with that SO name).

Cheers,
Filipe LaĆ­ns

Actions #1

Updated by laforge 28 days ago

  • Assignee set to steve-m

Assigning to steve-m as I have close to zero involvement into rtl-sdr. I just [previously] worked on the e4k tuner driver as part of a different project.

Actions #2

Updated by laforge 28 days ago

Without confirming the specific claims/findings about the current rtl-sdr status (I didn't verify/investigate), in general I agree to the comments raised about so versioning. In all of the more cellular-oriented osmocom projects/libraries (like libosmocore, libosmo-netif, libosmo-abis, libosmo-sigtran, etc.) we do follow project source code version != so-version, as described in Make_a_new_release.

Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF

Add picture from clipboard (Maximum size: 48.8 MB)