Chinput can use any of libpng2 or libpng3, it just need a rebuild.
Yu Guanghui <ygh at dlut.edu.cn>
Dalian University of Technology, China
引用 "Steve M. Robbins" <email@example.com>:
> I'd like to solicit opinions about what to do with
> Until August 2002, the Debian imlib packages were linked with libpng2.
> Even after libpng3 was released in early 2002, imlib remained linked
> with the older libpng2. This was done to retain the ABI of imlib,
> especially the ABI of the GNOME version, gdk-imlib.
> Imlib is more-or-less dormant upstream. However, in late August, I
> was under the impression that upstream imlib was going to release a
> new version (with new SONAME) that would be linked with libpng3. In
> anticipation of that, I introduced imlib2/imlib-dev into Debian but
> filed a Grave bug against it to keep it from moving to testing.
> It is still not in testing.
> I no longer believe that upstream will release any new versions of
> imlib and I plan to ask that imlib2 be removed from the archive. I
> don't want to change the current imlib1 linkage since imlib is pretty
> much dormant and probably on its way out.
> There are six packages currently linked against imlib2:
> I'm not sure whether they strictly require png3 or whether they could
> simply be rebuilt with imlib1 and libpng2. In the past, however, some
> KDE folks have explicitly requested imlib+png3.
> What would be the best way to accomodate such a request? I can
> imagine introducing a new package of imlib linked with libpng3. But
> since it has to use the same SOVERSION as the current imlib1, it would
> have to conflict with imlib1. Each individual admin could then choose
> to use imlib+png2 or to use imlib+png3. However, each choice would
> have its own set of incompatible programs so this option doesn't
> appeal to me.
> Another option is to drop the idea of imlib+png3. The six packages
> mentioned above would then have to build either with png2 or somehow
> incorporate imlib into their source build. For the maintainers of the
> six packages: is that feasible?