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

Re: First motif commits

On 31-01-13 21:11, Graham Inggs wrote:
> 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
> <mailto:graham@nerve.org.za>> wrote:
>     I've had a look at incorporating
>     d/patches/05-multiarch-specialcase-libdir-X11.patch into
>     configure.ac <http://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'.

I think I agree.

>     Also, /usr/lib/X11/system.mwmrc can be relocated to
>     /usr/share/X11, but remain in package mwm.

Have to investigate, but I assume for know you know what you are proposing.

>     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.

See above.

>     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).

Although indeed not allowed, I see your point. Maybe we can justify it
by the move to main? Hmm, I guess not, but indeed I believe it doesn't
work now anyway as the xprint support is removed etc.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: