On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 09:44:57PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Sune Vuorela ([email protected]) [100214 21:32]: > I fear I need to agree with you. We should have libjpeg62 with > symbols, recompile every package build-depending on libjpeg*-dev after > that till the release, and then move to libjpeg8 (or whatever it is) > at the begining of the squeeze+1-cycle (and we can be sure nothing > breaks because of the symbols).
Ok so I have experimented with a libjpeg62 source with versionned symbols, It works fine but for an annoying problem: If you compile-time link a binary with libjpeg62 w/ versionned symbols, and try to run-time link it with libjpeg62 w/o versionned symbols, then the dynamic linker output a warning: cjpeg: /usr/lib/libjpeg.so.62: no version information available (required by cjpeg) Normally this should not be an issue for Debian, but this will cause problems for people wanting to build LSB package on Debian: when run on as non Debian LSB-compliant platform, the binaries will generate linker warning, which can cause problems. Maybe we will have to provide an extra package with the non-versionned libjpeg62. Cheers, -- Bill. <[email protected]> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100314232945.gb7...@yellowpig
