Bruce, On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 04:49:13PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote: > Henrique answered your question. There has been some divergence between > various distributions regarding the naming and especially the versioning > of these libraries. We would heal that fork to increase compatibility. > Doing that means that some names and version tags are going to change > for some people. Of course we want to see everyone involved bearing some > of that load, rather than Debian bearing the lion's share of it. Requiring us to ship/link against a particular soversion of a library is one thing; Debian copes with changes to upstream soversions on a regular basis. Changing library *names*, OTOH, is something quite different -- and in the first case, providing "compatibility with the old names" totally defeats the purpose of *having* sonames, whereas in the second case, it still sounds like gratuitous change to me. I'm skeptical to begin with of the benefits LCC has to offer Debian -- being bound not just to an external *standard*, but to an external *implementation* requires sacrificing autonomy in areas that have been historically important to Debian, such as timely security fixes and arch-specific fixes for architectures not covered by the LCC -- and the wording from your original message set off a very large red flag for me besides. Can you provide pointers to concrete LCC proposals of library renames, so that I can get comfortable with the technical specifics of what's really at issue here? Thanks, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer > >On Wed, 08 Dec 2004, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > > > >>How in the world does changing the names of core system libraries serve > >>the > >>technical goal of providing better *compatibility* between distros? > >>Indeed, > >>how could this be anything other than a gratuitous change? > >> > >> > > >Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > >Good question. OTOH, getting all of us to use a common naming *AND > >VERSIONED > >SYMBOL TAGS* for everything is a worthy goal. If this project will help > >with that... > > > > > > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature