[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libtiff status: only 21 to go

On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 03:06:07PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:

> >   Jay Berkenbilt <ejb@ql.org> writes:

> >   > Executive summary: enlightenment is the last package that is blocking
> >   > some other package.  guikachu's maintainer specifically requested
> >   > NMU.  Here's the rest of the details.
> >   >
> >   > It's possible that some of these have been uploaded but not processed
> >   > far enough for the RC bug to have been closed.  My apologies if your
> >   > package is in this list.

> >   BTW, is rebuilding against libtiff-dev (provided by libtiff4-dev) enough,
> >   or is build-depending on libtiff4-dev really necessary and why?

> I'll give my opinion, but someone with more experience with Debian
> library issues may contradict me.

> My opinion is that if your application uses libtiff directly and does
> not use any libraries that use libtiff, then there's no reason for you
> to not just use libtiff-dev.  At present, libtiff-dev is provided only
> by libtiff4-dev (in sid) because libtiff3g-dev no longer exists (in
> sid).

> It is possible in the future that more than one package will provide
> libtiff-dev.  If I have anything to do with it, should this happen,
> any additional packages that provide libtiff-dev would have versioned
> symbols.  I think this means that it would be safe for you to use
> libtiff-dev instead of libtiff4-dev now even if your application uses
> other libraries that also use libtiff, but I'm not 100% sure about
> this because I have not yet learned all the subtitles of versioned
> symbols.  (This situation will soon be corrected.)

> I'm sure someone will correct this if I am wrong.

Depending on the order in which the libraries are loaded, having one lib
with versioned symbols and one without loaded into memory can still be a

But I don't think that's much of an issue when looking at the build
dependencies, here.  I seem to recall, though, that pure-virtual
build-deps (as libtiff-dev is) are usually considered bad form?

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: