Re: New control field proposal which could help on gcc3.2 transition
On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 12:05:39PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 02:10:08AM +0200, Manuel Estrada Sainz wrote:
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > I wrote the following proposal a while back, but decided that since it
> > > was post-woody, I would wait. But woody is out and I think that it
> > > could also be usefull for the gcc3.2 transition.
> >
> > If a package changes it's backward compatibility, it should change it's
> > soname and thus it's package name, IMO.
>
> Genralize it past library packages and this isn't really much of an
> option though. Something like debconf FE can break backwards
> compatability and yet has no soname, unfortunatly.
I program can more easily retain backward compatibility though. You've
generally done so quite well by having things like an API where the user
of the API defines which version it is using.
Libraries can do the same thing with versioned symbols (and I've yet to
understand why more things don't do this...portability perhaps).
--
Debian - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/
Reply to: