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

Re: Important for KDE 4 users: KDE 4.0.3 and KDE 4.1 trunk



On 2008-04-07, Christophe Prud'homme <prudhomm@debian.org> wrote:

Hi Christophe

> Hi Ramon
>
> I guess that you wanted to send your email to the debian-kde list ;)
> I agree with you that the lib renaming is going to trigger quite a lot
> of problems.
> I had indeed to reinstall skype using the static lib because the
> libqt4-core renaming.

We do our best to keep it simple.  but issues like abi changes and stuff
needs to be dealt with properly.

As a boost maintainer I think you know about that ;)

We might provide a libqt4-core transitional package, but taht is still
undecided. (please see thread on -release)

I don't know if ubuntu will follow the rename.

/Sune

>
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:06 PM, Ramon Antonio Parada
><rap@ramonantonio.net> wrote:
>> Are you really sure that removing libqt4-core and adding libqtcore4 is
>>  a good idea? Maybe can be different packages but what I really care
>>  about is dependencies. Any application that runs with libqt4-core 4.3
>>  will run if you have installed libqtcore4. Compatibility must be
>>  maintained forward, not backward.
>>
>>  1. User's won't just have problems when updating to qt 4.4. External
>>  packages like skype will take months for updating, becoming broken.
>>  (Runs ok both with libqt4-core 4.3 and libqtcore4 4.4 but depends on
>>  libqt4-core). Then they will have to deal with Ubuntu Dapper that
>>  includes libqt4-core 4.3.
>>
>>  3. After that don't know if Ubuntu will do the same renaming for next
>>  version but many people will still use Dapper so in worst case there
>>  will be three or four different combinations and packages (or
>>  dependency changes) must be done to deal with this situation.
>>
>>
>>  Don't have a good knowledge of the reasons for renaming but please,
>>  Keep It Simple
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  Ramon Antonio Parada
>>  Skype: ramon.parada
>>  Spain: +34 651 948819
>>  US: +1 (310) 651-8072
>>  http://ramonantonio.net/
>>
>
>


Reply to: