Re: jack still broken
Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:
> How else do you handle the case of a library which implements a line
> protocol (presumably Unix sockets, in this case), and that protocol has
> changed incompatibly?
You implement the new protocol on a new port, so that both the old and
new jackd can be run at the same time.
>> This has been going on for three months.
>
> Why has it taken three months for the reverse dependencies to be rebuilt?
> That shouldn't really be acceptable, whether or not there's some reason for
> (effective) conflicts between different versions of the lib.
AFAICT there weren't bugs filed against those packages telling them to
be rebuilt, because the libjack people believe their libraries don't
conflict.
Thomas
Reply to: