Re: G++ 2 => 3 transition (was Re: GNU C++ 3.0 porting help wanted)
Sean Middleditch writes:
> Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>> Upstream should have changed the version number to reflect the ABI
>> change anyway, shouldn't they?
> Not if upstream doesn't release a new version and Debian tries to
> convert the whole system.
I think that's a response to "upstream will have..." rather than
"upstream should have...". Do you believe they *shouldn't* change
shared library version number when the ABI changes?
If upstream are shipping code that will produce shared libraries then
surely that is the first place to go to decide what the new shared
library version should be. Each individual Linux distribution
inventing its own new numbers will just lead to incompatibility.
> Not to mention upstream can be pretty dumb sometimes... ~,^
Better to give them the chance to do the right thing, rather than
assuming they're going to be stupid from the start, I would have