[redirecting to debian-devel for further discussion] On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 10:53:26AM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > As I see it, the question boils down to whether the added fact that > partial woody upgrades and third party software linked with libtiff > could be affected is sufficient to make us want to go through the pain > of an ABI reversion. I would still maintain that it isn't, especially > since it's likely that the affected applications are limited to those > for which release-critical bugs have been reported. Changing the ABI without changing the SONAME is an RC bug. The fact that the software currently in sarge/sid has made it over this hump doesn't change that. For a lesser-used library, it might have been ok to let this slide, but I'm sure there are third-party binaries available that use libtiff. Debian has always made a point to get these transitions right, and this one should be no exception. I'm dismayed that this bug wasn't addressed sooner. It is very possible at this point that fixing this will delay the release. That's unfortunate, but I don't believe it's something we can dispense with. The best solution, without causing more segfaults along the way, is to change the SONAME to match the change in ABI. Reverting the ABI would only cause more pain; the only way out is through. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature