On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:10:59 +0200, Danny Backx wrote:
>Why even bother with 2.0 ?
>
>TOG has deliberately created incompatibilities between 2.0 and 2.1,
>I see no reason to support and/or promote 2.0.
I didn't promote it.
I just explained how it was thought to be a stable
(binary compatible) "2.x" release. We still can't
guarantee that our today's 2.1 libXm will be binary
compatible with that of next year.
No, it's fine for me. I can just re-compile my
dozens of apps. Other people may feel different.
>Installing both 1.2 and 2.1 in one directory is a very interesting
>idea, but it might be a challenge for libtool as well. Has it been
>designed for this ?
No idea, didn't try so far.
Perhaps someone should just give some "simplified"
Makfiles for lib/Xm* a try (locally, not in CVS :-)
---
Alexander Mai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
