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

Re: Newer versions of libpng.

Philippe Troin <phil@fifi.org> writes:

> Ok.
> I've taken over the maintenance of libpng with the approval of the 
> current maintainer (Michael Alan Dorman <mdorman@calder.med.miami.edu>
> ).
> The current debianized release of libpng is 0.89c. I've debianized 
> 0.95a.
> But... 0.89c has a soname of 1, and a library name of 1.0.89c. Which 
> will be inconsistent with the upcoming release of libpng 1.0 (pretty 
> soon).
> As there are binary incompatibilities between 0.89c and 0.95a 
> (programs dynamically linked with libpng 0.89c won't work with 0.95a, 
> they'll crash), I'd like to bump down the library version to 0.95a 
> with a soname of 0.
> Does anyone has an objection about this ?
> This will break the following packages:
[package list ] 
> Note that the above packages will be broken anyways because of the 
> binary library incompatibility :-)
> If I don't get objections with this, I'll proceed and upload libpng 
> 0.95a.
> I'll notify the maintainers of the above packages to tell them to 
> recompile their packages.
I support this procedure. The original versioning of the png
library is horribly broken. Just be sure to include conflicts to those
packages mentioned above with the version as shipped in bo.
The only problem is with telling dpkg that the new package really is an
upgrade, not a downgrade.

As one of the issues for hamm is the switch to libc6 and all of the
libraries have to be recompiled anyway it's no large problem with
having a different version number for the library. 


Helmut Geyer                                Helmut.Geyer@iwr.uni-heidelberg.de
public PGP key available :           finger geyer@saturn.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de

Attachment: pgpKErSQkFT41.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: