Le lun 14/04/2003 à 16:45, Drew Scott Daniels a écrit :
> 2 libpng transition? debian-devel has some discussion about this archived
> for Jan and Jul 2002. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200207/msg01106.html is quite interesting.
As the new maintainer of libpng, I can say a few words : new libpng
1.0.x packages are awaiting for ftpmaster approval, bringing a
transition similar to that of libpng 1.2.x. Minor changes to libpng
1.2.x will follow soon.
I don't think the transition should be over for sarge, but it would be
nice to have it for sarge+1. In short, it means for maintainers of
packages using libpng :
* The source packages should build-depend on libpng-dev or libpng12-dev,
but those build-depending on libpng3-dev will still work.
An important exception is the packages build-depending on
libpng2-dev, mostly GTK+ 1.2 packages; they will still work, but
I highly encourage maintainers to switch to libpng10-dev as soon
as it is out of queue/new. This means they have to use the
libpng10-config script in the makefiles to link to the right
library, but with the important gain that libpng10-dev doesn't
conflict with libpng12-dev.
* binary packages should depend on libpng10-0 or libpng12-0 instead of
libpng2 or libpng3. This will happen automatically when they are
rebuilt. That's the part which would be nice to get done before the
sarge+1 release.
* upstream is planning to add support for versioned symbols in the
future; this may or may not break stuff.
> 3 guile 1.4 -> 1.6 transition?
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200302/msg00255.html
Guile 1.6 is still broken in unstable. As it can be installed along
guile 1.4, maybe we will have to stick to 1.4.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\
: :' : josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org
`. `' joss@debian.org
`- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature