Re: Dependencies on shared libs, news and difference between archs
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 06:09:42AM +0300, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 15:19:02 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > I think my work is mostly ready for unstable as it is. The last step is to
> > convince Guillem Jover, the main dpkg maintainer, to merge that in the
> > master branch. He believes that supporting odd cases encourages bad
> > practice on library management. I don't think so. On the contrary I'd like
> > to promote sane library management and I made some efforts in the included
> > documentation to promote that.
> First, thanks for your work on this!
> For libraries with versioned symbols, just checking for the needed
> version nodes should be enough, and I'd say that adding symbols to
> a previously existing version node or breaking their ABI is broken,
> and something that we should not tolerate.
Huh? Adding new symbols without adding new version nodes doesn't break
anything of substance, so why would you say this is "broken"?
--
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/
Reply to: