Re: Libpng0 and libpng0-dev 0.95b-1 (i386) uploaded to master.
On 28 Apr 1997 08:55:30 EDT Michael Alan Dorman (mdorman@calder.med.mi
ami.edu) wrote:
> Philippe Troin <phil@fifi.org> writes:
> > It is supposed to replace libpng1 and libpng1-dev (with libpng0 and
> > libpng0-dev). The downwards version number change is to
> > resynchronize with the upstream version number.
>
> Well, when I took on libpng, the authors were stating that 1.0 would
> soon be out :-), and that there were not significant changes planned
> before that time. Hence the soname I chose.
It makes sense. However it's been long since libpng is still
0.something, so I thought it was good to do this. I emailed you about
the suggested change, but you didn't answer (not a criticism, I can
understand that you've got other stuff to do).
> > Notice that there is a binary incompatibility between libpng0 and
> > libpng1 (not only because of the soname, but the API changed
> > slightly).
>
> Are you *sure* it changed sufficiently to require a new soname? Mere
> addition of a function isn't sufficient---that's upwards compatible,
> and you would just need to change the shlibs file to list the new
> version as the minimum accepted version. It must have changed an
> existing structure or deleted or changed an existing function for this
> to be necessary.
>
> All I ask is that you please make sure this is *truly* warranted,
> otherwise you're causing a lot of unnecessary work.
That is truly necessary. The symbols in pre-0.90 and 0.90 and later are the same, but the API changed enough to make previously linked executables to dump core or fail. This is documented in the linpng docs.
I thought it was a good time to change the soname to the actual version number.
Phil.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . Trouble?
e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: