Debian Bug report logs -
#869778
libgsl2: soname change breaks dependencies
Toggle useless messages
Report forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 11:18:03 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Michal Politowski <mpol@charybda.icm.edu.pl>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 11:18:03 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
Package: libgsl2
Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
Severity: important
libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
If the soname changed, package name must change too.
--
Michał Politowski
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 11:36:03 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 11:36:03 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #10 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
| Package: libgsl2
| Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
| Severity: important
|
| libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
| libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
| this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
|
| If the soname changed, package name must change too.
Right. I'll change the soname.
Dirk
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 11:36:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 11:36:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Merged 869778 869779
Request was from Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>
to 869779-submit@bugs.debian.org.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 11:39:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Severity set to 'grave' from 'important'
Request was from Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>
to 869779-submit@bugs.debian.org.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 11:39:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:03:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to James Cowgill <jcowgill@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:03:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #24 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi,
On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
> | Package: libgsl2
> | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
> | Severity: important
> |
> | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
> | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
> | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
> |
> | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
>
> Right. I'll change the soname.
From NEWS:
> ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
> gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
> gsl_bspline_deriv_free
Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
incompatible SONAME).
Thanks,
James
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]
Reply sent
to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:21:12 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Notification sent
to Michal Politowski <mpol@charybda.icm.edu.pl>:
Bug acknowledged by developer.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:21:13 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #31 received at 869778-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
Source: gsl
Source-Version: 2.4+dfsg-2
We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
gsl, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.
A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.
Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you
have further comments please address them to 869778@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org> (supplier of updated gsl package)
(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 06:41:07 -0500
Source: gsl
Binary: libgsl2 libgsl-dev gsl-bin libgsl-dbg libgsl-prof
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.4+dfsg-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>
Changed-By: Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>
Description:
gsl-bin - GNU Scientific Library (GSL) -- binary package
libgsl-dbg - GNU Scientific Library (GSL) -- debug symbols package
libgsl-dev - GNU Scientific Library (GSL) -- development package
libgsl-prof - GNU Scientific Library (GSL) -- profiling symbols package
libgsl2 - GNU Scientific Library (GSL) -- library package
Closes: 869695 869778
Changes:
gsl (2.4+dfsg-2) unstable; urgency=medium
.
* configure.ac: Once again reset sonumber to 19 (Closes: #869778, #869695)
Checksums-Sha1:
e8c9eb3a4fa1991486bc0517e15e5e86d43e8325 1927 gsl_2.4+dfsg-2.dsc
af027219c1309efd137bdf8c6a68260345c8bc0e 18384 gsl_2.4+dfsg-2.debian.tar.xz
2750f34267533146f34ccc7a2ab10f489292d9fb 28906 gsl-bin_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
6951e88ea98d91e232cf4cab2d3456ac685bea29 5435 gsl_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.buildinfo
0d81a7b4fe2dc9f812f97335df5cb47c912d1628 2440982 libgsl-dbg_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
6da4564247bfdbd0cbc5335bc3d5eee3caffd435 1017366 libgsl-dev_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
9965624b9d3fac2d982b53bc435295224f0e24a0 914578 libgsl2_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
Checksums-Sha256:
fc124b0c63131daf7cc38af0810d9e9ee84729a2dc6abecc0acecce92cd7a14d 1927 gsl_2.4+dfsg-2.dsc
d1e68d2e173f921c12e48aa3f723d7acdca3d177e0d4aa8fe9d41217b1a25077 18384 gsl_2.4+dfsg-2.debian.tar.xz
7e7d71096b30fe7f6541336de6f54871181234441ef6a62c39a46ffc82160333 28906 gsl-bin_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
392645f310739d529b393417ff1e2d1c84258a939a3297834887c0c2d8cb33b1 5435 gsl_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.buildinfo
54560642fe520a0a2eeebd9a7c90f8dc29d90213623b10c37d413ca44b134815 2440982 libgsl-dbg_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
4df8c449f9c0e21782da7c9ccec0d83e3d39af923bd46587ec1c678487089598 1017366 libgsl-dev_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
f0e63f6db86a56ecf0fa6f0815e6fbcd721ad166883bd4426eca780f6ad1c1e0 914578 libgsl2_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
Files:
6a063e8bdbbeb820cd747c0a87b24071 1927 math optional gsl_2.4+dfsg-2.dsc
32364054a9596019d25bc301b4269ecd 18384 math optional gsl_2.4+dfsg-2.debian.tar.xz
a1a84f25f1a85965667b99488439c4b7 28906 math optional gsl-bin_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
8ed4fc605b5dbfab1fc154ceee3ae16c 5435 math optional gsl_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.buildinfo
bf0988e976515c153e81b5ee95937cf6 2440982 debug extra libgsl-dbg_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
b922c6141b75c810a2945711e9a7b1e5 1017366 libdevel optional libgsl-dev_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
df31c55db94cc41f23ec7563a1601df8 914578 libs optional libgsl2_2.4+dfsg-2_amd64.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=CClS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply sent
to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:21:13 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Notification sent
to Jan Korbel <debian@teptin.net>:
Bug acknowledged by developer.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:21:13 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Reply sent
to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:21:14 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Notification sent
to Antonio Ospite <ao2@ao2.it>:
Bug acknowledged by developer.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:21:14 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:21:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:21:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #44 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
Control: reopen -1
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:57:55 +0100, James Cowgill wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> > On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
> > | Package: libgsl2
> > | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
> > | Severity: important
> > |
> > | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
> > | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
> > | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
> > |
> > | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
> >
> > Right. I'll change the soname.
>
> From NEWS:
> > ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
> > gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
> > gsl_bspline_deriv_free
>
> Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
> and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
> incompatible SONAME).
>
Yes. You need to either bump SONAME *and* change package name, or keep
the package name and SONAME but revert the ABI breakage. There's no
option where you get to break ABI but keep the SONAME and/or package
name.
Cheers,
Julien
Bug reopened
Request was from Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>
to 869778-submit@bugs.debian.org.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:21:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
No longer marked as fixed in versions gsl/2.4+dfsg-2.
Request was from Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>
to 869778-submit@bugs.debian.org.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:21:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #49 received at 869781-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
On 26 July 2017 at 13:31, Antonio Ospite wrote:
| Package: libgsl2
| Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
| Severity: normal
2.4+dfsg-2 is already in unstable, affressing this.
Dirk
|
| Dear Maintainer,
|
| since libgsl2=2.4+dfsg-1 reverse dependencies are broken, I experienced
| the problem with bogofilter (which depends on bogofilter-bdb which
| depends on libgsl2):
|
| bogofilter: error while loading shared libraries: libgsl.so.19: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
|
| This seems to happens because 2.4+dfsg-1 bumped the library version but
| the package name is always the same and does not reflect the SONAME
| change.
|
| In libgsl2=2.4+dfsg-1 we have:
|
| libgsl2: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
| libgsl2: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23.0.0
|
| In libgsl2=2.3+dfsg-1 we had:
|
| /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19
| /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19.3.0
|
| as bogofilter expects.
|
| Downgrading to libgsl2=2.3+dfsg-1 fixes the problem with bogofilter.
|
| Rebuilding the reverse dependencies would also work but maybe this is
| the chance to fix the package name of libgsl2?
|
| Thanks,
| Antonio
|
| -- System Information:
| Debian Release: buster/sid
| APT prefers unstable
| APT policy: (900, 'unstable'), (500, 'unstable-debug')
| Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
|
| Kernel: Linux 4.11.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
| Locale: LANG=it_IT.utf8, LC_CTYPE=it_IT.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=it_IT.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
| Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
| Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
|
| Versions of packages libgsl2 depends on:
| ii libc6 2.24-12
|
| libgsl2 recommends no packages.
|
| Versions of packages libgsl2 suggests:
| pn gsl-ref-psdoc | gsl-doc-pdf | gsl-doc-info | gsl-ref-html <none>
|
| -- no debconf information
| --
| Antonio Ospite
| https://ao2.it
| https://twitter.com/ao2it
|
| A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
| See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
| Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:42:09 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:42:09 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #54 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
On 26 July 2017 at 12:57, James Cowgill wrote:
| Hi,
|
| On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
| > | Package: libgsl2
| > | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
| > | Severity: important
| > |
| > | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
| > | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
| > | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
| > |
| > | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
| >
| > Right. I'll change the soname.
|
| From NEWS:
| > ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
| > gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
| > gsl_bspline_deriv_free
|
| Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
| and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
| incompatible SONAME).
We have this discussion on every release. Look what is in (upstream's)
configure.ac:
dnl Library versioning (C:R:A == current:revision:age)
dnl See the libtool manual for an explanation of the numbers
dnl
dnl gsl-1.0 libgsl 0:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.1 libgsl 1:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.1.1 libgsl 2:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.2 libgsl 3:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.3 libgsl 4:0:4 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.4 libgsl 5:0:5 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.5 libgsl 6:0:6 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.6 libgsl 7:0:7 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.7 libgsl 8:0:8 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.8 libgsl 9:0:9 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.11 libgsl 12:0:12 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.12 libgsl 13:0:13 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.13 libgsl 14:0:14 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.14 libgsl 15:0:15 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.15 libgsl 16:0:16 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.2 libgsl 20:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.2.1 libgsl 21:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl
dnl (*) There was an error on this release. Firstly, the versioning
dnl numbers were not updated. Secondly, 2 functions were removed, but
dnl the age not reset--this should have been 11:0:0. However these
dnl functions were not documented and are regarded as internal, so we
dnl will assume 11:0:11.
dnl
dnl (**) There was an error on this release. Age should have been
dnl reset to 18:0:0
I maitained this for close to 20 years, and we done (IIRC) ONE soname change.
I'd rather not get into the dance of forcing soname changes.
Thanks, Dirk
|
| Thanks,
| James
|
| [DELETED ATTACHMENT signature.asc, application/pgp-signature]
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:42:11 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:42:11 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #59 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
On 26 July 2017 at 15:18, Julien Cristau wrote:
| Control: reopen -1
|
| On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:57:55 +0100, James Cowgill wrote:
|
| > Hi,
| >
| > On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > > On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
| > > | Package: libgsl2
| > > | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
| > > | Severity: important
| > > |
| > > | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
| > > | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
| > > | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
| > > |
| > > | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
| > >
| > > Right. I'll change the soname.
| >
| > From NEWS:
| > > ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
| > > gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
| > > gsl_bspline_deriv_free
| >
| > Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
| > and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
| > incompatible SONAME).
| >
| Yes. You need to either bump SONAME *and* change package name, or keep
| the package name and SONAME but revert the ABI breakage. There's no
| option where you get to break ABI but keep the SONAME and/or package
| name.
Allow me to quote myself from a reply I just sent a minute ago:
We have this discussion on every release. Look what is in (upstream's)
configure.ac:
dnl Library versioning (C:R:A == current:revision:age)
dnl See the libtool manual for an explanation of the numbers
dnl
dnl gsl-1.0 libgsl 0:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.1 libgsl 1:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.1.1 libgsl 2:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.2 libgsl 3:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.3 libgsl 4:0:4 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.4 libgsl 5:0:5 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.5 libgsl 6:0:6 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.6 libgsl 7:0:7 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.7 libgsl 8:0:8 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.8 libgsl 9:0:9 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.11 libgsl 12:0:12 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.12 libgsl 13:0:13 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.13 libgsl 14:0:14 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.14 libgsl 15:0:15 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.15 libgsl 16:0:16 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.2 libgsl 20:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.2.1 libgsl 21:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
dnl
dnl (*) There was an error on this release. Firstly, the versioning
dnl numbers were not updated. Secondly, 2 functions were removed, but
dnl the age not reset--this should have been 11:0:0. However these
dnl functions were not documented and are regarded as internal, so we
dnl will assume 11:0:11.
dnl
dnl (**) There was an error on this release. Age should have been
dnl reset to 18:0:0
I maitained this for close to 20 years, and we done (IIRC) ONE soname change.
I'd rather not get into the dance of forcing soname changes.
I stand by this.
Dirk
|
| Cheers,
| Julien
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:45:02 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:45:02 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #64 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
On 07/26/2017 03:39 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 26 July 2017 at 15:18, Julien Cristau wrote:
> | Control: reopen -1
> |
> | On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:57:55 +0100, James Cowgill wrote:
> |
> | > Hi,
> | >
> | > On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > > On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
> | > > | Package: libgsl2
> | > > | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
> | > > | Severity: important
> | > > |
> | > > | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
> | > > | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
> | > > | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
> | > > |
> | > > | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
> | > >
> | > > Right. I'll change the soname.
> | >
> | > From NEWS:
> | > > ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
> | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
> | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_free
> | >
> | > Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
> | > and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
> | > incompatible SONAME).
> | >
> | Yes. You need to either bump SONAME *and* change package name, or keep
> | the package name and SONAME but revert the ABI breakage. There's no
> | option where you get to break ABI but keep the SONAME and/or package
> | name.
>
> Allow me to quote myself from a reply I just sent a minute ago:
>
> We have this discussion on every release. Look what is in (upstream's)
> configure.ac:
>
> dnl Library versioning (C:R:A == current:revision:age)
> dnl See the libtool manual for an explanation of the numbers
> dnl
> dnl gsl-1.0 libgsl 0:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.1 libgsl 1:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.1.1 libgsl 2:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.2 libgsl 3:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.3 libgsl 4:0:4 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.4 libgsl 5:0:5 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.5 libgsl 6:0:6 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.6 libgsl 7:0:7 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.7 libgsl 8:0:8 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.8 libgsl 9:0:9 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.11 libgsl 12:0:12 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.12 libgsl 13:0:13 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.13 libgsl 14:0:14 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.14 libgsl 15:0:15 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.15 libgsl 16:0:16 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.2 libgsl 20:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.2.1 libgsl 21:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl
> dnl (*) There was an error on this release. Firstly, the versioning
> dnl numbers were not updated. Secondly, 2 functions were removed, but
> dnl the age not reset--this should have been 11:0:0. However these
> dnl functions were not documented and are regarded as internal, so we
> dnl will assume 11:0:11.
> dnl
> dnl (**) There was an error on this release. Age should have been
> dnl reset to 18:0:0
>
> I maitained this for close to 20 years, and we done (IIRC) ONE soname change.
>
> I'd rather not get into the dance of forcing soname changes.
>
> I stand by this.
>
That's fine, you don't have to change the SONAME, so long as you revert
the ABI breakage.
Cheers,
Julien
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:51:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to James Cowgill <jcowgill@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:51:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #69 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi,
On 26/07/17 14:39, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> On 26 July 2017 at 15:18, Julien Cristau wrote:
> | Control: reopen -1
> |
> | On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:57:55 +0100, James Cowgill wrote:
> |
> | > Hi,
> | >
> | > On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > > On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
> | > > | Package: libgsl2
> | > > | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
> | > > | Severity: important
> | > > |
> | > > | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
> | > > | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
> | > > | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
> | > > |
> | > > | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
> | > >
> | > > Right. I'll change the soname.
> | >
> | > From NEWS:
> | > > ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
> | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
> | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_free
> | >
> | > Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
> | > and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
> | > incompatible SONAME).
> | >
> | Yes. You need to either bump SONAME *and* change package name, or keep
> | the package name and SONAME but revert the ABI breakage. There's no
> | option where you get to break ABI but keep the SONAME and/or package
> | name.
>
> Allow me to quote myself from a reply I just sent a minute ago:
>
> We have this discussion on every release. Look what is in (upstream's)
> configure.ac:
>
> dnl Library versioning (C:R:A == current:revision:age)
> dnl See the libtool manual for an explanation of the numbers
> dnl
> dnl gsl-1.0 libgsl 0:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.1 libgsl 1:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.1.1 libgsl 2:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.2 libgsl 3:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.3 libgsl 4:0:4 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.4 libgsl 5:0:5 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.5 libgsl 6:0:6 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.6 libgsl 7:0:7 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.7 libgsl 8:0:8 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.8 libgsl 9:0:9 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.11 libgsl 12:0:12 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.12 libgsl 13:0:13 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.13 libgsl 14:0:14 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.14 libgsl 15:0:15 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.15 libgsl 16:0:16 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.2 libgsl 20:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.2.1 libgsl 21:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl
> dnl (*) There was an error on this release. Firstly, the versioning
> dnl numbers were not updated. Secondly, 2 functions were removed, but
> dnl the age not reset--this should have been 11:0:0. However these
> dnl functions were not documented and are regarded as internal, so we
> dnl will assume 11:0:11.
> dnl
> dnl (**) There was an error on this release. Age should have been
> dnl reset to 18:0:0
>
> I maitained this for close to 20 years, and we done (IIRC) ONE soname change.
The list above only contains 3 ABI changes, of which one was "ignored"
by upstream.
The first one (ignored as detailed above):
> dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
One here:
> dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
And the current one we're talking about here:
> dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
James
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:15:11 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:15:11 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #74 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
On 26 July 2017 at 14:48, James Cowgill wrote:
| Hi,
|
| On 26/07/17 14:39, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > On 26 July 2017 at 15:18, Julien Cristau wrote:
| > | Control: reopen -1
| > |
| > | On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:57:55 +0100, James Cowgill wrote:
| > |
| > | > Hi,
| > | >
| > | > On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > | > > On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
| > | > > | Package: libgsl2
| > | > > | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
| > | > > | Severity: important
| > | > > |
| > | > > | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
| > | > > | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
| > | > > | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
| > | > > |
| > | > > | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
| > | > >
| > | > > Right. I'll change the soname.
| > | >
| > | > From NEWS:
| > | > > ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
| > | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
| > | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_free
| > | >
| > | > Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
| > | > and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
| > | > incompatible SONAME).
| > | >
| > | Yes. You need to either bump SONAME *and* change package name, or keep
| > | the package name and SONAME but revert the ABI breakage. There's no
| > | option where you get to break ABI but keep the SONAME and/or package
| > | name.
| >
| > Allow me to quote myself from a reply I just sent a minute ago:
| >
| > We have this discussion on every release. Look what is in (upstream's)
| > configure.ac:
| >
| > dnl Library versioning (C:R:A == current:revision:age)
| > dnl See the libtool manual for an explanation of the numbers
| > dnl
| > dnl gsl-1.0 libgsl 0:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.1 libgsl 1:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.1.1 libgsl 2:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.2 libgsl 3:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.3 libgsl 4:0:4 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.4 libgsl 5:0:5 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.5 libgsl 6:0:6 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.6 libgsl 7:0:7 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.7 libgsl 8:0:8 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.8 libgsl 9:0:9 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.11 libgsl 12:0:12 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.12 libgsl 13:0:13 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.13 libgsl 14:0:14 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.14 libgsl 15:0:15 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.15 libgsl 16:0:16 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-2.2 libgsl 20:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-2.2.1 libgsl 21:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl
| > dnl (*) There was an error on this release. Firstly, the versioning
| > dnl numbers were not updated. Secondly, 2 functions were removed, but
| > dnl the age not reset--this should have been 11:0:0. However these
| > dnl functions were not documented and are regarded as internal, so we
| > dnl will assume 11:0:11.
| > dnl
| > dnl (**) There was an error on this release. Age should have been
| > dnl reset to 18:0:0
| >
| > I maitained this for close to 20 years, and we done (IIRC) ONE soname change.
|
| The list above only contains 3 ABI changes, of which one was "ignored"
| by upstream.
|
| The first one (ignored as detailed above):
| > dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
|
| One here:
| > dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
|
| And the current one we're talking about here:
| > dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
Hm. Colour me confused.
Have I been reading this wrong all this time by reading _from left to right_
and refusing to force a new soname (and package name) on every release?
If the 'age reset to 0' is the actionable item, then I'd be up for it. I
could make a -3 release with a libgsl23 package keeping it at libgsl-dev.
I guess that's better than forcing a non-change.
Dirk
| James
|
| [DELETED ATTACHMENT signature.asc, application/pgp-signature]
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:39:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to James Cowgill <jcowgill@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:39:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #79 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi,
On 26/07/17 15:10, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> On 26 July 2017 at 14:48, James Cowgill wrote:
> | On 26/07/17 14:39, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > On 26 July 2017 at 15:18, Julien Cristau wrote:
> | > | Control: reopen -1
> | > |
> | > | On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:57:55 +0100, James Cowgill wrote:
> | > |
> | > | > Hi,
> | > | >
> | > | > On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > | > > On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
> | > | > > | Package: libgsl2
> | > | > > | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
> | > | > > | Severity: important
> | > | > > |
> | > | > > | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
> | > | > > | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
> | > | > > | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
> | > | > > |
> | > | > > | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
> | > | > >
> | > | > > Right. I'll change the soname.
> | > | >
> | > | > From NEWS:
> | > | > > ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
> | > | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
> | > | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_free
> | > | >
> | > | > Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
> | > | > and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
> | > | > incompatible SONAME).
> | > | >
> | > | Yes. You need to either bump SONAME *and* change package name, or keep
> | > | the package name and SONAME but revert the ABI breakage. There's no
> | > | option where you get to break ABI but keep the SONAME and/or package
> | > | name.
> | >
> | > Allow me to quote myself from a reply I just sent a minute ago:
> | >
> | > We have this discussion on every release. Look what is in (upstream's)
> | > configure.ac:
> | >
> | > dnl Library versioning (C:R:A == current:revision:age)
> | > dnl See the libtool manual for an explanation of the numbers
> | > dnl
> | > dnl gsl-1.0 libgsl 0:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.1 libgsl 1:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.1.1 libgsl 2:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.2 libgsl 3:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.3 libgsl 4:0:4 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.4 libgsl 5:0:5 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.5 libgsl 6:0:6 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.6 libgsl 7:0:7 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.7 libgsl 8:0:8 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.8 libgsl 9:0:9 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.11 libgsl 12:0:12 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.12 libgsl 13:0:13 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.13 libgsl 14:0:14 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.14 libgsl 15:0:15 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.15 libgsl 16:0:16 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-2.2 libgsl 20:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-2.2.1 libgsl 21:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl
> | > dnl (*) There was an error on this release. Firstly, the versioning
> | > dnl numbers were not updated. Secondly, 2 functions were removed, but
> | > dnl the age not reset--this should have been 11:0:0. However these
> | > dnl functions were not documented and are regarded as internal, so we
> | > dnl will assume 11:0:11.
> | > dnl
> | > dnl (**) There was an error on this release. Age should have been
> | > dnl reset to 18:0:0
> | >
> | > I maitained this for close to 20 years, and we done (IIRC) ONE soname change.
> |
> | The list above only contains 3 ABI changes, of which one was "ignored"
> | by upstream.
> |
> | The first one (ignored as detailed above):
> | > dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> |
> | One here:
> | > dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> |
> | And the current one we're talking about here:
> | > dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
>
> Hm. Colour me confused.
>
> Have I been reading this wrong all this time by reading _from left to right_
> and refusing to force a new soname (and package name) on every release?
>
> If the 'age reset to 0' is the actionable item, then I'd be up for it. I
> could make a -3 release with a libgsl23 package keeping it at libgsl-dev.
>
> I guess that's better than forcing a non-change.
Yes the "age reset to 0" is what causes ABI breakage and will cause an
SONAME change on Linux - you don't need to change the package name every
single release. I think renaming the package to libgsl23 (which will cause a
package transition) is the correct thing to do.
This page has some info on how libtool versions libraries (and I don't
blame you for reading this wrong - it is quite confusing):
https://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Versioning.html
Thanks,
James
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 15:21:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 15:21:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #84 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
On 26 July 2017 at 15:36, James Cowgill wrote:
| Hi,
|
| On 26/07/17 15:10, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > On 26 July 2017 at 14:48, James Cowgill wrote:
| > | On 26/07/17 14:39, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > | > On 26 July 2017 at 15:18, Julien Cristau wrote:
| > | > | Control: reopen -1
| > | > |
| > | > | On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:57:55 +0100, James Cowgill wrote:
| > | > |
| > | > | > Hi,
| > | > | >
| > | > | > On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > | > | > > On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
| > | > | > > | Package: libgsl2
| > | > | > > | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
| > | > | > > | Severity: important
| > | > | > > |
| > | > | > > | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
| > | > | > > | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
| > | > | > > | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
| > | > | > > |
| > | > | > > | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
| > | > | > >
| > | > | > > Right. I'll change the soname.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > From NEWS:
| > | > | > > ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
| > | > | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
| > | > | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_free
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
| > | > | > and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
| > | > | > incompatible SONAME).
| > | > | >
| > | > | Yes. You need to either bump SONAME *and* change package name, or keep
| > | > | the package name and SONAME but revert the ABI breakage. There's no
| > | > | option where you get to break ABI but keep the SONAME and/or package
| > | > | name.
| > | >
| > | > Allow me to quote myself from a reply I just sent a minute ago:
| > | >
| > | > We have this discussion on every release. Look what is in (upstream's)
| > | > configure.ac:
| > | >
| > | > dnl Library versioning (C:R:A == current:revision:age)
| > | > dnl See the libtool manual for an explanation of the numbers
| > | > dnl
| > | > dnl gsl-1.0 libgsl 0:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.1 libgsl 1:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.1.1 libgsl 2:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.2 libgsl 3:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.3 libgsl 4:0:4 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.4 libgsl 5:0:5 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.5 libgsl 6:0:6 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.6 libgsl 7:0:7 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.7 libgsl 8:0:8 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.8 libgsl 9:0:9 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.11 libgsl 12:0:12 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.12 libgsl 13:0:13 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.13 libgsl 14:0:14 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.14 libgsl 15:0:15 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.15 libgsl 16:0:16 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-2.2 libgsl 20:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-2.2.1 libgsl 21:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl
| > | > dnl (*) There was an error on this release. Firstly, the versioning
| > | > dnl numbers were not updated. Secondly, 2 functions were removed, but
| > | > dnl the age not reset--this should have been 11:0:0. However these
| > | > dnl functions were not documented and are regarded as internal, so we
| > | > dnl will assume 11:0:11.
| > | > dnl
| > | > dnl (**) There was an error on this release. Age should have been
| > | > dnl reset to 18:0:0
| > | >
| > | > I maitained this for close to 20 years, and we done (IIRC) ONE soname change.
| > |
| > | The list above only contains 3 ABI changes, of which one was "ignored"
| > | by upstream.
| > |
| > | The first one (ignored as detailed above):
| > | > dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > |
| > | One here:
| > | > dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > |
| > | And the current one we're talking about here:
| > | > dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| > | > dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
| >
| > Hm. Colour me confused.
| >
| > Have I been reading this wrong all this time by reading _from left to right_
| > and refusing to force a new soname (and package name) on every release?
| >
| > If the 'age reset to 0' is the actionable item, then I'd be up for it. I
| > could make a -3 release with a libgsl23 package keeping it at libgsl-dev.
| >
| > I guess that's better than forcing a non-change.
|
| Yes the "age reset to 0" is what causes ABI breakage and will cause an
| SONAME change on Linux - you don't need to change the package name every
| single release. I think renaming the package to libgsl23 (which will cause a
| package transition) is the correct thing to do.
Thanks for the patient help -- really appreciate it.
I think I will create a libgsl23 tomorrow then, giving other a chance to
chime in if need be.
One "technical" question: Is "causes ABI breakage" correct in the sense of
instructing ld.so to balk at this? Or more a "recommended to set to 0 to
signal an ABI change" ?
Dirk
|
| This page has some info on how libtool versions libraries (and I don't
| blame you for reading this wrong - it is quite confusing):
| https://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Versioning.html
|
| Thanks,
| James
|
| [DELETED ATTACHMENT signature.asc, application/pgp-signature]
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 16:33:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to James Cowgill <jcowgill@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>.
(Wed, 26 Jul 2017 16:33:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #89 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi,
On 26/07/17 16:18, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> On 26 July 2017 at 15:36, James Cowgill wrote:
> | On 26/07/17 15:10, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > On 26 July 2017 at 14:48, James Cowgill wrote:
> | > | On 26/07/17 14:39, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > | > On 26 July 2017 at 15:18, Julien Cristau wrote:
> | > | > | Control: reopen -1
> | > | > |
> | > | > | On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:57:55 +0100, James Cowgill wrote:
> | > | > |
> | > | > | > Hi,
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > On 26/07/17 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > | > | > > On 26 July 2017 at 13:14, Michal Politowski wrote:
> | > | > | > > | Package: libgsl2
> | > | > | > > | Version: 2.4+dfsg-1
> | > | > | > > | Severity: important
> | > | > | > > |
> | > | > | > > | libgsl2 2.3+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.19 (on i386)
> | > | > | > > | libgsl2 2.4+dfsg-1 contains /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgsl.so.23
> | > | > | > > | this breaks packages depending on libgsl2.
> | > | > | > > |
> | > | > | > > | If the soname changed, package name must change too.
> | > | > | > >
> | > | > | > > Right. I'll change the soname.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > From NEWS:
> | > | > | > > ** removed routines which were deprecated in v2.1:
> | > | > | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_alloc
> | > | > | > > gsl_bspline_deriv_free
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > Isn't this an ABI break? If so, upstream changing the SONAME was correct
> | > | > | > and the package should be renamed (instead of reusing the old
> | > | > | > incompatible SONAME).
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | Yes. You need to either bump SONAME *and* change package name, or keep
> | > | > | the package name and SONAME but revert the ABI breakage. There's no
> | > | > | option where you get to break ABI but keep the SONAME and/or package
> | > | > | name.
> | > | >
> | > | > Allow me to quote myself from a reply I just sent a minute ago:
> | > | >
> | > | > We have this discussion on every release. Look what is in (upstream's)
> | > | > configure.ac:
> | > | >
> | > | > dnl Library versioning (C:R:A == current:revision:age)
> | > | > dnl See the libtool manual for an explanation of the numbers
> | > | > dnl
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.0 libgsl 0:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.1 libgsl 1:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.1.1 libgsl 2:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.2 libgsl 3:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.3 libgsl 4:0:4 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.4 libgsl 5:0:5 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.5 libgsl 6:0:6 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.6 libgsl 7:0:7 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.7 libgsl 8:0:8 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.8 libgsl 9:0:9 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.11 libgsl 12:0:12 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.12 libgsl 13:0:13 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.13 libgsl 14:0:14 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.14 libgsl 15:0:15 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.15 libgsl 16:0:16 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.2 libgsl 20:0:1 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.2.1 libgsl 21:0:2 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl
> | > | > dnl (*) There was an error on this release. Firstly, the versioning
> | > | > dnl numbers were not updated. Secondly, 2 functions were removed, but
> | > | > dnl the age not reset--this should have been 11:0:0. However these
> | > | > dnl functions were not documented and are regarded as internal, so we
> | > | > dnl will assume 11:0:11.
> | > | > dnl
> | > | > dnl (**) There was an error on this release. Age should have been
> | > | > dnl reset to 18:0:0
> | > | >
> | > | > I maitained this for close to 20 years, and we done (IIRC) ONE soname change.
> | > |
> | > | The list above only contains 3 ABI changes, of which one was "ignored"
> | > | by upstream.
> | > |
> | > | The first one (ignored as detailed above):
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.9 libgsl 10:0:10 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.10 libgsl 10:0:10 (*) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > |
> | > | One here:
> | > | > dnl gsl-1.16 libgsl 17:0:17 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.0 libgsl 18:0:18 (**) libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.1 libgsl 19:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > |
> | > | And the current one we're talking about here:
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.3 libgsl 22:0:3 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | > | > dnl gsl-2.4 libgsl 23:0:0 libgslcblas 0:0:0
> | >
> | > Hm. Colour me confused.
> | >
> | > Have I been reading this wrong all this time by reading _from left to right_
> | > and refusing to force a new soname (and package name) on every release?
> | >
> | > If the 'age reset to 0' is the actionable item, then I'd be up for it. I
> | > could make a -3 release with a libgsl23 package keeping it at libgsl-dev.
> | >
> | > I guess that's better than forcing a non-change.
> |
> | Yes the "age reset to 0" is what causes ABI breakage and will cause an
> | SONAME change on Linux - you don't need to change the package name every
> | single release. I think renaming the package to libgsl23 (which will cause a
> | package transition) is the correct thing to do.
>
> Thanks for the patient help -- really appreciate it.
>
> I think I will create a libgsl23 tomorrow then, giving other a chance to
> chime in if need be.
>
> One "technical" question: Is "causes ABI breakage" correct in the sense of
> instructing ld.so to balk at this? Or more a "recommended to set to 0 to
> signal an ABI change" ?
Yeah the term I used probably isn't quite right.
If you don't set age to 0 but break the ABI, applications may crash at
any time (missing symbols will cause ld.so to fail, public struct
changes will cause segfaults etc). This is "ABI breakage".
If you do set age to 0 forcing an "ABI break" then the library name will
change. In theory you could then ship both the old and new libraries and
everything will work. After rebuilding everything with the new library,
you can safely remove the old one.
James
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]
Added indication that 869778 affects krita
Request was from Pino Toscano <pino@debian.org>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(Thu, 27 Jul 2017 05:51:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Bug reopened
Request was from Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(Thu, 27 Jul 2017 21:12:02 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Information forwarded
to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>:
Bug#869778; Package libgsl2.
(Tue, 08 Aug 2017 00:57:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Ximin Luo <infinity0@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>.
(Tue, 08 Aug 2017 00:57:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #100 received at 869778@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
Control: block 870688 by 869778
Control: affects 869778 + sagemath
Ximin Luo:
> Tobias Hansen:
>> [..]
>>
>> The accidental upload of cysignals 1.6.5 to unstable is now a RC bug
>> (#870688). Not sure if we should fix it by downgrading cysignals,
>> patching sage 7.6 or just let the bug sit until we upload sage 8.0. At
>> least the "Breaks: sagemath (<< 8.0~)" does indeed prevent cysignals
>> from migrating to testing, which is good.
>>
>> [..]
>
> Hi, I'm at DebConf over the next week and will very likely be able to find some time to deal with this.
>
Hi, I see that libgsl23 was uploaded but who is taking care of the library transition? It seems that this process was not followed:
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions
The transition tracker detected the library change:
https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-gsl.html
However there is no corresponding Transition Tracking bug report:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=release.debian.org
Currently this prevents me from doing test builds of sagemath, because some of its build dependencies are not installable:
[..]
cd .. && sbuild \
--extra-repository='deb http://httpredir.debian.org/debian experimental main' \
--chroot-setup-commands='apt-get install -y apt-transport-https' \
--extra-repository='deb https://debian-science.alioth.debian.org/apt sid-sage/' \
--extra-repository-key=/home/infinity0/var/lib/sage/sagemath/debian/deb-sci-sage.asc \
--build-dep-resolver=aspcud \
--build-failed-commands '%SBUILD_SHELL' \
\
"sagemath_8.0-0~sage1.dsc"
[..]
(I)Distcheck: Solving...
output-version: 1.2
native-architecture: amd64
report:
-
package: sbuild-build-depends-sagemath-dummy
version: 0.invalid.0
architecture: amd64
status: broken
reasons:
-
conflict:
pkg1:
package: libgslcblas0
version: 2.4+dfsg-5
architecture: amd64
unsat-conflict: libgsl2:amd64
pkg2:
package: libgsl2
version: 2.4+dfsg-2
architecture: amd64
depchain1:
-
depchain:
-
package: sbuild-build-depends-sagemath-dummy
version: 0.invalid.0
architecture: amd64
depends: libgsl-dev:amd64
-
package: libgsl-dev
version: 2.4+dfsg-5
architecture: amd64
depends: libgslcblas0:amd64 (= 2.4+dfsg-5)
depchain2:
-
depchain:
-
package: sbuild-build-depends-sagemath-dummy
version: 0.invalid.0
architecture: amd64
depends: python-cvxopt:amd64
-
package: python-cvxopt
version: 1.1.9+dfsg-1+b1
architecture: amd64
depends: libgsl2:amd64
[..]
X
--
GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35
GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE
https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
Added indication that bug 869778 blocks 870688
Request was from Ximin Luo <infinity0@debian.org>
to 869778-submit@bugs.debian.org.
(Tue, 08 Aug 2017 00:57:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Added indication that 869778 affects sagemath
Request was from Ximin Luo <infinity0@debian.org>
to 869778-submit@bugs.debian.org.
(Tue, 08 Aug 2017 00:57:07 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Reply sent
to Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility.
(Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:27:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Notification sent
to Michal Politowski <mpol@charybda.icm.edu.pl>:
Bug acknowledged by developer.
(Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:27:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Message #109 received at 869778-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):
Version: 2.4+dfsg-6
On Wed, 26 Jul 2017 10:18:43 -0500 Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org> wrote:
> I think I will create a libgsl23 tomorrow then, giving other a chance to
> chime in if need be.
This happened, so this bug is fixed. I'm taking care of the binNMUs etc.
Emilio
Reply sent
to Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility.
(Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:27:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Notification sent
to Jan Korbel <debian@teptin.net>:
Bug acknowledged by developer.
(Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:27:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Reply sent
to Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility.
(Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:27:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Notification sent
to Antonio Ospite <ao2@ao2.it>:
Bug acknowledged by developer.
(Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:27:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Reply sent
to Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility.
(Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:27:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Notification sent
to Philipp Wörner <philipp20woerner@gmail.com>:
Bug acknowledged by developer.
(Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:27:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Bug reassigned from package 'libgsl2' to 'src:gsl'.
Request was from Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(Tue, 15 Aug 2017 05:39:02 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
No longer marked as found in versions gsl/2.4+dfsg-1.
Request was from Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(Tue, 15 Aug 2017 05:39:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
No longer marked as fixed in versions 2.4+dfsg-6.
Request was from Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(Tue, 15 Aug 2017 05:39:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Marked as found in versions gsl/2.4+dfsg-1.
Request was from Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(Tue, 15 Aug 2017 05:39:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Marked as fixed in versions gsl/2.4+dfsg-6.
Request was from Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(Tue, 15 Aug 2017 05:39:10 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Added indication that 869778 affects libgsl2
Request was from Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(Tue, 15 Aug 2017 05:39:12 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Bug archived.
Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <owner@bugs.debian.org>
to internal_control@bugs.debian.org.
(Tue, 12 Sep 2017 07:25:09 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Send a report that this bug log contains spam.
Debian bug tracking system administrator <owner@bugs.debian.org>.
Last modified:
Sat Jan 13 02:05:21 2024;
Machine Name:
buxtehude
Debian Bug tracking system
Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU
Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained
from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.
Copyright © 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson,
2005-2017 Don Armstrong, and many other contributors.