Re: C++ transition stumbling blocks?
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 08:56:36PM +0100, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> Yes, but if users have installed the library, it will persist. And
> packages depending on the library should be rebuilt. It doesn't matter
> that ABI has changed, as long as API hasn't.
If you don't care about the immediate future, this is correct.
> Do you really want to say that id3lib breaks *API* with every micro version?
No, it doesn't.
> Just consider other C++ library packages, such as libsigc++: It has a
> 1.2 encoded into the library name and source package (not 1.2.x).
id3lib has all three numbers in the soname.
> In the course of the 1.2.x releases, they broke ABI and API (even in a
> quite severe way, once), but there were no 1.2.x source packages due to
> this. They only changed soname (and tus binary pkg name) of the shared
> library. I think id3lib is quite similar...
Also consider glib 1.1.1_1.1.1-1, gtk 1.1.x, libogg/libvorbis, etc.
Upstream breaking the ABI without updating the soname does suck, and it
sounds like you handled it correctly, but that's not what has happened here.
Anyway, new packages are in incoming. Let me know if zinf has any problem
building with them.
--
Robert Woodcock - rcw@debian.org
"Recommending that children [...] not [...] use them as a weapon to hit
another person, could eliminate more than 40 per cent of backpack injuries"
-- A Michigan hospital research team
Reply to: