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

Re: fun with libgal

Jules Bean <jules@jellybean.co.uk> cum veritate scripsit:

> Yes, it's a fairly well known problem.
> But what you describe is *not* how it is usually solved.  In fact,
> it's not usually solved at all.  It is usually left broken.

The fact that it's usually not solved does not give an excuse for
solving it.

I presented a solution which will work within the Package Dependency
framework of Debian, which some packages are following.

People might have been unaware about this because they simply didn't know
that this was a solution. Or maybe there is a better way to go.
I am not sure.

This problem is orthogonal to the topic of discussion (fun with libgal),
but it is one of the problems that exist currently.
We don't have to end up with many versions of shared library,
we may want to pull some shared library versions out,
but we don't just want to replace a shared library package 
with the same name and incompatible ABI. 


dancer@debian.org : Junichi Uekawa   http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423  7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4

Reply to: