[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Do not link GNOME1 apps with libpng3



On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:16:30PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 01:07:26PM -0200, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> > On 09 Jan 2002 15:09:08 +0100
> > Christian Marillat <marillat.christian@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > 
> > > > Now, the question is: should GNOME move to libpng3, and how?  The QT/KDE
> > > > folks have sidestepped the problem by declaring that libqt2 is
> > > > remaining linked against libpng2, while libqt3 links with libpng3.  I
> > > > don't see why we shouldn't adopt the same approach: leave imlib1
> > > > linked with libpng2 and let imlib's successor libraries link against
> > > > libpng3.  Comments?
> > > 
> > > I disagree completely. We should *always* compile all packages against
> > > the latest library version and not downgrade the builg dependency to an
> > > old library. We have did the same change to move to libdb3.
> > > 
> > > I really want to know why recompiling gdk-imlib1 is too hard ?
> >
> > I can see your point, but the change from db2 to db3 happened months
> > ago, and I really think libpng3 should be investigated before
> > we move all gnome apps to use it... we must take care, because the
> > freeze is going and this can delay it more and more or remove
> > some gnome programs from woody
> 
> I tend to agree with you, Gustavo.  
> 
> It also bears keeping in mind:
> 
> * imlib1 is deprecated and won't be used in GNOME 2
> * Redhat is going to keep GNOME 1 linked with libpng2
> * Debian KDE is keeping libqt2 linked with libpng2
>   (and moving to libpng2 only with libqt3)
> 
> Moreover, nobody has produced a compelling reason to make the
> switch other than "libpng3 is newer than libpng2".  In the 
> absence of such, leaving imlib1 linked with libpng2 seems to
> me to be the wisest course of action, *especially* during a freeze.
> 

Moreover I guess libqt2 (which is essentially frozen) is tested with 
libpng2, not libpng3.
It's not a good policy generally to change libraries without
a good reason and extensive testing. In all mails I overviewed in these
days I cannot find any issue about this. What's the real reason for
changing library? "It's newer" is not a good reason :) We could
discover new problems in linking qt2 with png3 we had not before.
Anyway, it's done. Maybe something about these bad practices 
is already present in the Policy Manual. If not something should be
obviuosly proposed. 

-- 
Francesco P. Lovergine



Reply to: