Re: xlibmesa naming and relationships
I'm sorry about the somewhat out of place reply, but I wanted to point
something out and this is most relevant place I could find.
>> Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> writes:
> Shared library packages carry part of the soname in their names so
> that multiple versions can be installed simultaneously. This does
> not seem to be the case here as 3 is not related to the soname. In
> the event that the mesa version number is bumped without the ABI
> changing, you risk either being inconsistent or changing the package
> name gratuitously.
There *is* going to be an OpenGL 2 in the future. Is that library
going to be called libGL.so.2 or libGL2.so.0, no idea. Since there are
a lot of reasons to keep a libGL.so.1 arround, and since atm it's not
clear how backwards compatibility is going to be preserved, my best
guess is the later (libGL2.so.x, with the x being pretty much
irrelevant). The virtual package would be called libgl2 (that's
entirery appropiate), and the XFree86 package would be called... uhm...
xlibmesa8-gl2? I hope not :-\ If the 3 is meaningless now, the 8
would step into the imaginary meaning domain :-) (FWIW, I picked 8 at
random, it's just a nice number)
Some people are, as I type, pondering the feature-set of an OpenGL 3.
--
Marcelo (give us GL_TETRA) Magallon
Reply to: