reassign 158165 gnome-libs thanks OK, we have Christian not even reading my messages and simply saying "Everyone else has jumped off a bridge! You haven't! Jump off the bridge already!". I'm not interested in jumping off bridges without any reason given, or in general. Can someone give me at least ONE reason why we should be breaking the ABI of GNOME 1 (which has been the same since at least GNOME 1.0 as far as PNG goes), and introducing incompatibilty with third party binaries and other distributions? GNOME 1 is in maintenance only mode upstream, and even that is slowing/stopping as resources are dedicated to GNOME 2. I'm asking for a reason for this breakage. The only one people have given seems to be "I want to have gnome1 and gnome2 dev packages installed side-by-side!" which really shouldn't be an issue as neither imlib nor gdk-pixbuf -dev packages depend on a png library. The _only_ GNOME 1 library that directly links (and uses) libpng that I know of is libgtkxmhtml1, which is not used by much at all, so this isn't a reason to break our ABI from what we have used in our own previous distros and in use by every other distro at this point. Can anyone give me this reason? Otherwise, I suggest we rebuild GNOME 1 with libpng2, and leave it be. The GNOME 2 transition "plan" seems to be to ship with only GNOME 2 (binaries at least, the libs from 1 may still be around for some applications that aren't ported to GNOME 2 by release) in sarge, and if that's the case, we have no reason to break the ABI before the release. Christian, if you are going to reassign this bug yet again with no reason given other than everyone jumping off the bridge, the correct package to reassign to is "tech-ctte", and we'll sit here with this broken setup for a few months while someone works out if we care about our users using binary-only non-free software. I think the social contract is rather clear on this point, but maybe I'm wrong. dancerj, what's the status of #155892 with upstream? Is this going to be considered/applied there, or do we have to deal with it in other ways? Another thing that would help is a change to glib's module support to allow loading without RTLD_GLOBAL, which, IMHO, for the image loading plugins is probably a good idea. Both imlib and gdk-pixbuf's loaders currently use the module support from glib. -- Ryan Murray, Debian Developer (rmurray@cyberhqz.com, rmurray@debian.org) The opinions expressed here are my own.
Attachment:
pgpOH35AeKDMy.pgp
Description: PGP signature