Hi Matthew, On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 10:00 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > And while we're at it, can we please drop the meaningless -1.2 suffix > > from the library names (e.g. libedataserver-1.2.so)? As far as I can > > tell this is just an artifact from an age before the EDS sonames were > > properly versioned.
Cue, screaming ... please read: http://lxr.go-oo.org/source/dba/connectivity/source/drivers/evoab2/EApi.cxx#046 and reconsider ;-) be aware that it takes weeks to months to get that change up-stream, and months to get a new version of OO.o out, and all the while OO.o will ~silently fail to work with people's new 'clean' renamed library e-d-s :-) AFAIR the name versioning was originally intended to ensure you could compile & develop multiple versions of evo. on the same system. > I don't think those application would be happy to do this. There are a > few apps that use the .so directly without pkgconfig (iirc > OpenOffice.org). Quite - we build our OO.o integration (which since it is up-stream has to run on ~all existing systems - cf. the ISV problem ...), with internal headers (to unwind the ABI breakage), and explicit dlopening & hooking out of symbols etc. > Unless there is a clear nod from the stake holders of those projects, I > wouldn't be favor of doing this. Thanks ! :-) Of course, as long as the dlopens still work, I'm fine with renaming the core library (to suit people's personal hygiene issues) as long as we have a compat symlink in perpetuity ;-) Thanks, Michael. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot _______________________________________________ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolutionemail@example.com http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers