On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 08:06:04PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 04:52:35PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > That whole crap was due to the lack of understanding of the problem > > and blindness to the proper solution (versioned symbols). > Whilst I agree with you as a library author myself, I disagree with you > as a Debian maintainer. > Debian should _not_ introduce gratuitous differences with upstream > authors. While we have fscked up in this point big time and multiple > times (myself being guilty of that charge), that doesn't mean we should > keep doing that. Nowadays it's possible to compile a simple hello > world C program on an unstable system and run it on a current yet > random Linux Distribution. That wasn't the case one or two years ago > because Debian kept "fixing" upstream problems. Nowadays it's even > possible to do the same with C++ programs. While it's definitely important to push changes such as symbol versioning upstream, it should be noted that Debian-specific symbol versions do not prevent you from taking binaries built elsewhere and running them on Debian systems. They do prevent you from taking binaries built on Debian and running them elsewhere; but given that failing to use versioned symbols frequently causes binaries built on Debian to not run on *Debian*, I believe this is the lesser of two evils. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature