Re: [Pkg-grass-general] RFS: grass 6.0.0beta1 CVS - tempfile bug fixed
On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 10:51 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 10:21:45AM +0100, Silke Reimer wrote:
> > > Already suggested that more and more time...
> > > Embedding the needed library within the grass source is the way to go IMHO.
> >
> > This is one solution. Another solution could be, not to rename the
> > grass-libs each time a new grass package ist create. I called the
> > gdal library libdal1 which is valid as long as all gdal-libs are
> > compatible with each other. As soon as a completly new version of
> > gdal comes along I will have to rename it to libgdal2 or something
> > similar. Wouldn't it be possible to use such a naming convention for
> > grass as well?
> >
> I wonder also why grassi/gdal folks do not adopt a standard library soname scheme
> to avoid breaking things when changing API (a la libtool to say).
I've filed a grass bug requesting this.
> > But perhaps Francesco and Paolo are right and we should indeed place
> > gdal-grass into the grass package. It shouldn't be too difficult to
> > build the plugin within the grass package.
> >
>
> That's probably the most straight method.
I think this is sub-ideal. It would require a new upload of grass for
every new version of gdal-grass. Based on the experience of others
combining things in a similar way it is more trouble than it's worth[1].
Steve
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=242593
Reply to: