On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 04:25:19PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 04:14:09PM +0200, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > > > As there were no symbols files for the old one in unstable: are you sure there > > > are no disappearing symbols? (Maybe gupnp_context_manager_finalize...) If > > > > Upstream seems to have a very good clue when it comes to ABI. > > c.f. gupnp-av and the introduction of the _size64 function rather then fixing > > (and breaking ABI of) the _size function, for large file support on > > 32bit arches. That was done intentionally to avoid ABI breakage. > > > > gupnp_context_manager_finalize was static, so it shouldn't affect the ABI. > > > > (The good upstream ABI clue might be related to our fellow DD, Ross Burton, > > is (part of) upstream. :)) > > Ok then. > > > > people could stop reindent files, that would be helpful, too. gvalue-util.c > > > doesn't make me happy. Using strtoul instead of atoi... why?[1] > > > > While the page you refer to points out some flaws with strtoul, atoi really > > isn't any better. It's probably of questional "bug fix" value though, just > > like the reindentation... > > Ok. > > > > There isn't a GNU Lesser General Public License version 2, right? That > > > replacement seems to be made of fail. Didn't review more, sorry. > > > > The license change (which probably is just a clarification of the original > > intent) is one of the reasons why I'd like to avoid shipping the old version. > > > > As for if a 2.0 version exists, most people still don't seem to tell > > Library or Lesser GPL apart, so my interpretation would be: > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.0.html > > The point is that COPYING is actually taking about the Lesser 2.1. So they > should name the correct license (which they are free to relicense it to) in the > license headers. > > Furthermore you now install dlna profiles, whatever they are. I'm not really > able to review the XML changes, and they weren't previously used in the > package? The installed dlna profiles files are machine readable xml files which try to define the rules for when a media file belongs to a certain "profile" in the (secret) DLNA standard. Unless you have access to the DLNA standard doc, I see no way for you (or me) to review the profiles. > > And in general it looks like a too big diff to review. ): Ok, will file for removal. > > Kind regards, > Philipp Kern > -- Andreas Henriksson
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature