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

Re: What happened to libgtkhtml19 in unstable?

On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Richard Braakman wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 11:11:24AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
> > The usual advantages of shared libraries:
> > - less disk space
> > - less memory usage when several application use the same library
> >
> > If this is no longer important I'll start to link my packages statically
> > with libc to avoid breakages with future libc versions...
> Libc *does* have a stable interface, or at least it tries to.  Libgal
> doesn't have that as a design goal.  A stable interface is essential
> for maintaining shared libraries, and designing one and keeping it
> stable is significantly more work than just publishing code.  I think
> the approach of the libgal maintainers is sensible if they're more
> interested in getting the code out than in polishing the interface.
> At the same time, I think that linking statically to libgal is sensible
> for programs that want to use that code.  That way they get to share
> at least the source.
> People who want the compiled code to be shared can go work on
> stabilizing the interface and moving code to more conservative libraries.
> That would be useful.

The situation seems to be a bit similar to the one with libXv, libXxf86dga
and libXxf86vm (with the exception upstream of GAL gives so-names to the
library - but in both cases upstream says that the library has an
unstable interface).

Should we stop to ship shared versions of libgal and link everything
statically with it? This would resolve the problems in other programs the
same way gnumeric already does.



Get my GPG key: finger bunk@debian.org | gpg --import

Fingerprint: B29C E71E FE19 6755 5C8A  84D4 99FC EA98 4F12 B400

Reply to: