Re: GNOME 1 ABI involving libpng
>>>>> On Fri, 6 Sep 2002 14:48:49 +0200,
>>>>> "MEM" == "Marcelo E. Magallon" <mmagallo@debian.org> wrote:
MEM> Can you come up with a real case of broken compatibility that such a
MEM> change could cause? I must be missing something really obvious,
MEM> because I can't (c.f. my previous mails).
I'm not sure but for example if there are some modules
depends on RTLD_GLOBAL, then we have patched glib2.0, such
modules won't work on Debian.
>> To another solution, if there are an architecture which has broken
>> RTLD_GLOBAL on Debian, I'll apply a patch to stop the glib2.0 build.
MEM> There isn't. Not even the vapourware architectures, I dare to guess.
Yes, *now*. and we can't promise dlopen isn't definitely
broken. if all you're afraid a compatibility, I think we
should do that to prevent the building with broken glibc.
MEM> I'm sorry, I didn't understand that. Do you mean that RH has a patch
MEM> that solves this problem which /does not/ involve patching glib but
MEM> gdk-pixbuf? If that exists and works, well, yes, that's acceptable,
MEM> too.
Yes, Red Hat did that to gdk-pixbuf, not glib1.2. that's one
of what Owen proposed.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200208/msg00669.html
Regards,
--
Akira TAGOH : tagoh@gnome.gr.jp / Japan GNOME Users Group
at@gclab.org : tagoh@gnome-db.org / GNOME-DB Project
: tagoh@redhat.com / Red Hat, Inc.
: tagoh@debian.org / Debian Project
Reply to: