On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 10:10:29AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061219 09:31]: > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 04:39:49PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > > > 7 X+ ++
> > These may or may not be a problem depending on whether the ABI has changed > > between the versions exported in 1.2.8 and 1.2.13/15. We should probably > > look at these individually. > These are: > png_get_int_32 > png_get_uint_16 > png_get_uint_31 > png_get_uint_32 > png_save_int_32 > png_save_uint_16 > png_save_uint_32 Cool, looks safe to me. > > > 1 X ++ > > There are an issue for shlibs only. (Assuming they're meant to be exported > > and shouldn't be suppressed to keep people from using them!) > Yes, we need to chek that. But this isn't an regression for the current > unstable version, so we could allow this version into etch. And this seems to be ok... > > > 2 X+++++++++ > > These are the only two symbols that would potentially be a reason to prefer > > .13 over .15. And this is being addressed by adding those symbols back. So the only other outstanding issue is handling those packages that use one of the 131 removed symbols. Cheers, -- 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/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
