On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 08:03:24PM -0500, Brian Nelson wrote: > Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 04:36:15PM -0500, Brian Nelson wrote: > >> Can someone please review http://bugs.debian.org/343060 and tell me what > >> to do about it? Several people are claiming libaspell needs to be > >> rebuilt, and in that case it would need a package name change and yet > >> another painful library transition. Obviously I don't want to do this > >> unless absolutely necessary. > > Since this seems to be a C++ package that only exports a C > > interface, a simple rebuild should do. There is no need to > > change the name. > So partial upgrades wouldn't break, then? Only in the special case of mixing unrelated libraries, implemented in C++, that use different ABIs. It seems scim is particularly good at exposing this particular problem... There's no good solution for this, as it would mean compiling a list of all such libraries that are wrapped in a C interface, and having each of the packages conflict with the old versions of each of the others. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
