On Thu, 9 Sep 2004, Brian Nelson wrote: > On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 09:59:32PM -0600, Kevin Atkinson wrote: > > > Earlier you mentioned the problem of installing both Aspell 0.50 and > > Aspell 0.60 due to the fact that I chose not to increment the so-name. I > > have attempted to remedy this situation by adding an compile time option > > to increment the so-name. Have you looked into this possibility? > > I've thought about it, but I think it's better (for Debian anyway) to > keep the soname the same. Changing the soname would require rebuilding > of all packages using the library (~30 or so) and the dictionaries, > whereas keeping the soname would only require rebuilding the > dictionaries.
No Problem, if you think that is better. > The transition could be gradual since the libaspell15 and the new > library (libaspell16?) could coexist, but I don't think there's much > benefit to keeping two libraries around. Yes it is libaspell16. I also added the ability to create a backwards compatibility library which simply links with libaspell16 for applications expecting libaspell16. I don't care either way. I just want to make sure you know what you options are. -- http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org _______________________________________________ Aspell-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/aspell-devel
