Re: Accepted sdl-image1.2 1.2.2-1 (i386 source)
On Sun, 21 Jul 2002 21:24:25 -0500
"Christian T. Steigies" <cts@debian.org> wrote:
> > Do you realize that it is bad idea to rebuild against libpng3
> > without changing the soname of your package?
>
> No I didn't, what do you propose?
>
> If a package keeps the same SONAME, it means that the BINARY COMPATIBILITY
> IS KEPT.
>
> I did not see any incompatibility (yet), are you sure it is necessary?
Yes.
Packages which are linked against libpng2 and sdl-image1.2
require recompile to be able to run.
libsdl-perl, libparagui1.0, criticalmass, burgerspace, armagetron
are probably affected.
I saw a package from Oohara Yuuma in debian-devel-changes with
such changelog.
> But I guess I'll have to revert to png2 and reopen he bug. Changing the
> soname would require an sdl-image1.2debian package?
will require a libsdl-image1.2-1 package, probably.
Don't bother reverting. Some people noticed the breakage and already
recompiled packages against libpng3 and sdl-image1.2
> If anybody who knows more about libraries than me is interested in
> maintaining sdl-image and sdl-mixer, I'd like to hear from you.
I'd suggest reading the docs, it's the best you can do right now.
Most people in Debian don't know about it, that is the largest problem.
We are severely lacking in the resource.
regards,
junichi
--
dancer@debian.org http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: