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

Re: libpng transition

On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 10:32:22AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Jan 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 09:27:00PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > Another way is to bump the soname on libL at the time you bump the one
> > > on libM.  People are usually against this, since in fact the libL
> > > interface hasn't changed at all.  I'm not sure whether that would
> > > actually solve all the problems.
> > But libL *has* changed: maybe the source API hasn't, but the binary API
> > *has*, and that what the so-name's for. Note that the shlibs need to be
> > changed too, which means changing the package name, too.
> Well, the binary API has changed, true, but only because of the way dynamic
> linking is being used. 

It doesn't really matter why, it just matters that the binary API
changed incompatibly. That means the shlibs need changing, as does the
package name.

> Since this is a change that is completely out of the
> control of the upstream maintainer, they will not like the idea of bumping
> the SONAME at all...

Well, the easy solution would be to avoid the problem and not release
with libpng3 in common use. There's a bit of a problem there due to
Build-Dependencies on libpng-dev, but that's not insolvable.

> So I'd mark that possibility as 'will not work' and skip to the next one.

(Yay for politics forcing bad technical solutions)


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

The daffodils are coming. Are you?
      linux.conf.au, February 2002, Brisbane, Australia
                                --- http://linux.conf.au/

Attachment: pgpj7KCH1FDvr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: