Re: Bug#155689: libgtk2.0-png3: -png3 should Provides: libgtk2.0-0
On Fri, 2002-08-09 at 01:08, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > You might say "recompile foo," but what if foo is a commercial program?
>
> If foo is a commercial program, it is more likely that it is
> linked against libgtk2.0 and png3, if it wants to reach a
> larger market.
What about locally-compiled programs? We're all set to break them
(possibly silently because their dependencies aren't in any packages) on
an upgrade, if libgtk2.0-0 is removed in favour of libgtk2.0-0png3.
That whole section of the libpkg-guide recommends doing things that are
horrendous for users if we've released a version of that library into
stable and then go changing its binary interface without changing the
soname.
(Yes, I know I should have spoken up sooner, Tagoh, but I hadn't thought
of it sooner.)
--
Joe Drew <hoserhead@woot.net> <drew@debian.org>
"This particular group of cats is mostly self-herding." -- Bdale Garbee
Reply to: