Hello,
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 04:01:34AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
True, the user could do a google search, but...
But what? If the user is going to visit the projects
home page he will have internet access so doing a google
search will not be a problem.
Jochen
--
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 04:01:34AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
Consider a user thumbing thru aptitude or apt-cache show.
He sees a brief description of a package that sounds good.
But he wants to know a little more before committing to a multi
megabyte download and install.
Therefore those
dyg dvf axti
ucz
dlopening with RTDL_GLOBAL, where there is an option to
dlopen with RTDL_LOCAL.
hmm... how does that behaves when the conflict is two or more libs down the
chain from the PoV of the stuff being dlopened?
I have thought that symbols are resolved locally, as to allow
modules to be
On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
I consider the following portion may be suitable for inclusion in the
policy; if it is more precisely worded:
If library or application dlopens a module, that module and its chain of
dependencies have a chance of being loaded in two versions at
Looks good to me. It can't go into policy yet, though. Not enough
machinery, and we really need to have all core libs converted and working to
whatever policy we choose before we propose it.
Yes, and I consider libpkg-guide to be a place to
start documenting things before policy is changed
* Junichi Uekawa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Looks good to me. It can't go into policy yet, though. Not enough
machinery, and we really need to have all core libs converted and working to
whatever policy we choose before we propose it.
Yes, and I consider libpkg-guide to be a place to
7 matches
Mail list logo
