Hi Günter can you please respond a short statement about API and ABI stability of poco.
- Patrick ---------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht ---------- Betreff: Re: RFS: poco (updated package) Datum: Samstag 26 Dezember 2009 Von: George Danchev <[email protected]> An: Patrick Roland Gansterer <[email protected]> Patrick Roland Gansterer writes: > George Danchev: > > I'm still waiting for an answer to this: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2009/12/msg00300.html > > Do you think that a symbols file will be the correct solution? I didn't > check the ABI history of poco, so i don't know if it is backward > compatible and if this is a goal of upstream. Well, adding symbols files is meant to control what symbols appear and disappear with new releases. OTOH, apparently upstream bumps the soname, since they break the binary compatibility (at least) in the first place, so the question is why they break the it with their library effectively obliterating one of the contracts a well maintained production library should provided -- stable binary and programing interfaces (for instance we don't want libc doing so with each new release). Krzysztof, clamfs needs to be rebuilt (binNMU [1]) against the latest poco library, too, since it now depends on libpocofoundation8 and libpoconet8 which will automatically disappear from the archive (deemed as cruft [2]). [1] http://wiki.debian.org/binNMU [2] http://ftp-master.debian.org/cruft-report-daily.txt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
