krb5 libraries and circular dependencies

Sam Hartman hartmans at MIT.EDU
Fri May 28 13:43:19 EDT 2010

>>>>> "Greg" == Greg Hudson <ghudson at MIT.EDU> writes:

    Greg> On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 13:14 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
    >> I don't have a strong opinion on combining libk5crypto and
    >> libkrb5.  If you combine them it's important to bump the soname
    >> of libkrb5.

    Greg> I don't want to bump the soname of libkrb5, and I don't think
    Greg> it's strictly necessary.  We would only be adding symbols to
    Greg> libkrb5.  

Greg, I think it will be impossible for me to manage the upgrade for
Debian without bumping the soname for libkrb5.  Debian goes out of its
way ((and I believe your build system on all glibc platforms does the
same) to bind symbols from libkrb5 and libk5crypto to specific
libraries.  So, applications will care which library and which soname
they get their libraries from.

The things I'm most concerned about are the transitional upgrade issues
where some but not all packages depending on libk5crypto and libkrb5
have been rebuilt.

I have not previously analyzed the situation where libk5crypto continues
to provide all the symbols it used to provide at the same symbol
versions.  In the other cases, though, everything needs to be rebuilt.
Based on my experience with the krb4 removal, that would only go
smoothly if the krb5 sonames changes.

I don't have a lot of time to go into detail now, but would be happy to
try and work through this.

More information about the krbdev mailing list