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

Re: First motif commits

Actually, it looks like we should ditch libmotif4 and name the separate packages libXm4, libUil4 and libMrm4.

On 31 January 2013 21:41, Graham Inggs <graham@nerve.org.za> wrote:
I've had a look at incorporating d/patches/05-multiarch-specialcase-libdir-X11.patch into configure.ac as a build option, and was thinking that perhaps now is the time to move these platform independent files, as Sergio suggested, from /usr/lib/X11/bindings to /usr/share/X11/bindings and into a separate package motif-common'.  Also, /usr/lib/X11/system.mwmrc can be relocated to /usr/share/X11, but remain in package mwm.

At the same time we could split the three shared libraries; libXm.so.*, libUil.so.* and libMrm.so.* into separate packages.  What do you think of the names libmotif4, libmotifuil4 and libmotifmrm4?  I know the name of the last one is redundant (mrm is Motif Resource Manager), but it is consistent with the others.

If we are in agreement with the above I'll start working on it.

I'm warming to the idea of releasing motif to experimental without printing support, without the missing XmPrint* exports, and without bumping the soname.
As I wrote previously, I don't believe this will break anything in Debian.  Should we start getting bug reports of broken applications, at least we'll have a test case for option 3 (Maintain ABI compatibility, but return failures from xprint methods).

Reply to: