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

Re: RFC: SDL and X static extension libraries re-revisited



On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 11:32:35PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> If I were in your shoes I'd probably decide that the _pic libraries
> with careful versioning for sdl are a better choice than the shared
> library.  It is more in sync with what upstream is doing and it
> provides the same level of compatibility.

More to the point, people developing against stock XFree86 won't be
building applications that expect to link against shared versions of
these libraries.  Anybody pulling a Debian-built binary of such a thing
may be in for a nasty surprise when their linker complains about its
failure to find a .so that doesn't even exist except on Debian.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |
Debian GNU/Linux                   |      If encryption is outlawed, only
branden@debian.org                 |      outlaws will @goH7Ok=<q4fDj]Kz?.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgplP4f1s6oKa.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: