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

Re: Accepted sdl-image1.2 1.2.2-1 (i386 source)

To give people a feeling what this means:

 > >  0. Recompile libpng2 and libpng3 with versioned symbols.

 These are four packages. :-) (Junichi's the maintainer for both)

 > >  1. Recompile all the library packages that link against libpng2 or
 > >     libpng3.

 If "all the library pacakges" means "either named ^lib or in section
 libs" this ammounts to 106 packages (i386, main + crontrib + non-free;
 no non-US) with 45 maintainers.

 > >  2. Recompile all the packages that depend on those libraries.

 These ammount to 431 packages (186 maintainers).

 > Your understanding is correct -- a binary that wants a versioned symbol
 > will not settle for an unversioned symbol.  Is this a grave concern?
 > Do we know that there are ISVs compiling (libpng-using) software on
 > Debian today with the expectation that their binaries will work
 > elsewhere?  As far as I've heard, /no one/ develops software on Debian
 > except for use on Debian-derived systems.

 Interoperability is from my point of view important; it might have to
 do with the environment I work at.  My development machine runs Debian,
 and sometimes it's useful to just copy binaries over to SuSE or RH
 boxes.  People get pretty annoyed when they compile stuff on one box
 and try to run it on another and it fails with "unresolved symbol ...".


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: