Re: Accepted sdl-image1.2 1.2.2-1 (i386 source)
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 09:07:26AM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 01:21:14PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa <dancer@netfort.gr.jp> was heard to say:
> > Packages which are linked against libpng2 and sdl-image1.2
> > require recompile to be able to run.
>
> burgerspace seems to work ok, possibly because it doesn't try to
> actually load pngs.
But criticalmass fails (and refused to switch back the screen resolution),
so there actually is a problem.
> > 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
>
> It might be worthwhile to adjust the shlibs of libsdl-image1.2,
> though (to tighten the dependency of binary packages)
> Otherwise people could upgrade the recompiled packages without
> upgrading sdl-image.
Somehow I haven't seen a consensus here yet. Do I update the soname or not?
Do I create a separate package or not?
As I understand it, we need another package to have both versions of the
library. But if both are to be installed at the same time, the soname has to
be different. If the soname is different, we break compatibility with
upstream? Another can of worms...
Christian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: