Re: Dpkg Update Proposal
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Craig Sanders wrote:
> the libgtk* versions are compatible with each other. the libgtk*-dev
> versions, are not (it would be possible to make it so by installing
> header files in /usr/include/gtk-VERSION, but you'd still have to modify
> every source file that #included it. in other words, it could be done
> but probably isn't worth the effort unless it's done upstream as well).
>
> fortunately, the -dev packages conflict with earlier versions, so it's
> not a problem.
>
> debian's way of handling this allows for all versions of libgtk to be
> installed simultaneously, allowing progress AND backwards compatibility
> without conflict.
Actually, we could acheive concurrent dev packages with use of the
alternatives mechanism and the (upstream) gtk-config programs.
> BTW, this is only a "problem" because the upstream libgtk1.1.x changes
> the programming interface without changing the .so number. they've got
> valid reasons for doing so (and they do advertise that fact), so there's
> really no need to come up with a general solution to a specific problem
> with one or two unstable/rapid development upstream packages.
There's no law (AFAIK) that it has to be the major number that changes to
signify API changes. It's simply the way you choose to organise your
symlinks.
And it's consistent to name the package after the API version.
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: