Re: fun with libgal
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 04:29:02PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> > If recompiling with a newer version of libgal causes an incompatibility
> > in libgtkhtml20 (I don't know whether it does or not), then its soname
>
> The soname is given by upstream...
Correct. Thus, if the library's version of libgal affects its binary
compatibility, the upstream maintainer of the library must pick a known
version of libgal for each library soname.
This is a fairly well-known problem with inter-library linkage in
general.
> > and package name must be changed, so evolution will continue to work
> > when linked against the library from the old libgtkhtml package. If it
> > doesn't cause an incompatibility, then the situation you describe is not
> > a problem.
>
> And people will start to ask that there should be different libgtkhtml20
> packages that are compiled with different libgal versions so that they
> don't have to recompile their packages...
Bugs like that should be closed. :)
> A different thing is that it could make things easier when libgal packages
> with new sonames wouldn't go into unstable as soon as they are available
> but only at dates coordinated with the maintainers of packages depending
> on libgal - I understand that these maintainers weren't happy when they
> saw a new soname every week. Especially to make it possible to get new
> libgal versions into testing it might help to have something like a "there
> won't be a new libgal soname within the next three weeks".
That sort of thing sounds extremely sensible.
ObBug: 95543 (well, diagnosed and downgraded, anyway)
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: