> "JF" == Jochen Friedrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JF> KDE is a special case due to the sheer number of libraries and
JF> different versions. bind9 is a better example, here each library is
JF> packaged individually with the correct name derived from the SONAME.
As it sadly, should be don
Hi Wes,
> TA> They ship libnetsnmpagent.so.X (together with
> TA> libnetsnmp{,helpers,mibs}.so.X) inside a package called libsnmpX.
>
> What do they do for other components with differing version numbers (if
> I had time I'd go look for an example to look up but I can't think of
> one off the top
Hi Wes,
> I actually suspect more people fall into that boat than people that will
> make use of the new structure directly in their application. I just
> think most people don't mind recompiling as much as third party
> commercial products running on an OS which just distributed a new
> version
> "RS" == Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
RS> I seriously doubt that they actually evaluate all the code using the library
RS> to actually determine that.
RS> They could actaully get away with not caring about structure size if
RS> they _always_ obtained and released the structures
> "RS" == Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
RS> Which is why I still think 5.4.1 should bump current and
RS> not just age.
You do realize we did right?
svn diff -r 15624 Makefile.top
Index: Makefile.top
===
--- Makefile.t
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 14:04:53 -0700 Wes wrote:
WH> TA> Great they do understand -- because I'm not sure I do (based on your
WH> TA> description above). What's their "special case" and what exactly do they
WH> TA> expect us to do?
WH>
WH> There special case was also described: they're not going to u
> "TA" == Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TA> If time is their major constraint and -coders doesn't work for them, I'd
TA> be happy to propose to set up -vendors/-packagers for them and make sure
TA> we bring up or summarize major vendor/packaging-related topics there.
TA> How does t
> "TA" == Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TA> Great they do understand -- because I'm not sure I do (based on your
TA> description above). What's their "special case" and what exactly do they
TA> expect us to do?
There special case was also described: they're not going to use any ne
Wes Hardaker wrote:
> Please don't require users to be -coders members. Yes, it would be nice
> if everyone would participate in every way. But our job should be to
> make things work as best as it can so people that don't have extra time
> can still use the software. Yes, I agree that vendors s
> "TA" == Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TA> The strange thing is that whenever we discuss library versions and ask
TA> for comments, vendors rarely show up with their feedback/complaints.
Please don't require users to be -coders members. Yes, it would be nice
if everyone would pa
10 matches
Mail list logo
