Re: [DebianGIS] Re: gdal
[Trying to send this message again. It was undeliverable the first time around.]
Silke,
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 09:53 +0100, Silke Reimer wrote:
> Hi Jon and all of you,
>
> I am now back from vacation and would like to join the efforts to
> build a good gdal package again :-)
Welcome back! The debian/ dir for gdal is in CVS on Alioth. Feel free to
add yourself as an uploader in the control file and make whatever
contributions you like.
8<---------snip-----------
>
> Since the soname is still libgdal.so.1 I don't understand why we
> couldn't leave the package name as it is and just represent the new
> release by increasing the package version. Thus the pacakge will be
> named libgdal1c2a-1.3.1-1.
Frank is only updating the soname correctly for the C API. We are to
expect binary compatibility to be broken for every release(even minor
point releases) for the C++ API. Thus the naming problem. Binary
compatibility is broken, but the soname is unchanged.
>
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > >
> > > Once we have this version in unstable I will begin looking into
> > > making a separate C++ library package that wont break qgis and
> > > mapserver with updates.
>
> I read the thread about ABI/API changes in the C++ and C library. If
> I understand it the right way, your suggestion means, that each time
> a new release of gdal has been made all packages that depend on the
> C++ library will have to be rebuild while those depending on the C
> library will have no harm as long as the soname doesn't change.
> Right?
>
> In this case this seems to be a good idea to me. Of course this
> means that at least mapserver and perhaps qgis will have to be
> rebuild more often than it would be preferable but in midterm we
> could perhaps bring the developers to adapt their sources.
I've asked on the qgis-dev list about changing to the C API.
Steve
>
> Please let me know if I can help out.
>
> > >
> > > Has anyone researched how other distrobutions are dealing with this
> > > issue?
>
> I don't think that other distributions have less problems with it. I
> built the package for Fedora an until now I havn't been aware of
> this problem so in conclusion this is not yet taken into account for
> package building.
>
> For SUSE there is the LINGIS project but I think this project is
> more or less in one hand. Thus the targets are not that evolving as
> this is the case for debian, Fedora-extras or other community driven
> distributions. Furthermore the release plan talks about a new
> version in April 2005 which hasn't come yet - so far as I know. Please
> correct me, if I am wrong.
>
> I don't know anything about Mandrake.
>
> Many greetings,
>
> Silke
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-grass-general mailing list
> Pkg-grass-general@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-general
Reply to: