[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ncurses build options...

> On Fri, 8 Dec 1995, Jeff Noxon wrote:
> > If the ncurses guys are going to keep blowing off binary compatibility,
> > then perhaps we should not mess with ncurses at all.
> I suspect, especially now that we've got the package load spread around
> more, that Debian will be able to keep up. 

I'm just concerned that this is a losing battle.  It might be fine for
static libraries, but for shared libraries to be effective they need to
remain compatible from one version to the next.

> Well, it's supposed to be faster, and, of course, BSD curses is no longer
> supported. 

I don't think BSD curses really needs support.  I wish it wasn't such a pain
to support two curses implementations at once.  (It's a nightmare)

As for faster, it is somewhat, but it's also a lot buggier at the moment.

> That doesn't necessarily excuse any of this mind you --- I've been on the
> ncurses list for all of a day and a half and I'm already hearing about
> 1.9.8 which apparently has some showstopper bugs that were reported but
> not fixed in time for the release. 

I have several months of the ncurses list archived.  If anyone is interested
in having a copy of the archive, please let me know how to deliver it.  :)

> I suspect that the distributed packaging responsibility will make it
> unlikely that it will get that bad --- one or two versions, maybe, tops. 

Hmm.  I'll be happy if we can just get a stable version, I suppose.

This is going to be a big problem for Linux binary compatibility between


Reply to: