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

Re: Packages that need to be rebuilt agaisnt libssl0.9.8

On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 05:44:25PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 07 octobre 2005 à 14:33 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> > > We're already doing it for libpng, as no one else seemed interested in
> > > properly version the symbols. There haven't been any issues reported so
> > > far.

> > What ever happened to libpng upstream's bizarre plan to hand-mangle symbol
> > names in lieu of versioning?  If they're not doing that, then someone
> > (like... the maintainer ;) should bludgeon them into accepting a patch for
> > real symbol versioning...

> They're planning to do that for the next major libpng version only.

I have a better idea, then; how about if they just never have new major
versions of libpng, ever again?  The last two soname changes were in fact
total bullshit, and judging by past events I can see them using symbol
versioning as an *excuse* to change an soname, which would be the most
ironically counterproductive option available to them...

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: