On Saturday, February 12, 2011 18:31:12 Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 02/13/2011 01:21 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Friday, February 11, 2011 11:49:43 Samuli Suominen wrote: > >> On 02/11/2011 06:38 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > >>> 4) What have we learned from libpng 1.2 -> 1.4 upgrade? I'd just like > >>> to be better informed. > >> > >> We have been discussing about removing libpng.pc, libpng.so and > >> unversioned headers from the libpng 1.5.x package allowing it to install > >> parallel with libpng 1.4.x. > > > > i dont see any real advantages with SLOT-ed installs of libpng beyond ABI > > (i.e. what we're doing today with libpng-1.2.x and libpng-1.4.x). there > > are however plenty of downsides. patching packages in the tree is a > > huge hassle, you add hassle to end users who d/l random packages and try > > to build things themselves, and you make Gentoo non-standard wrt every > > other distro out there. > > > > best we follow what everyone else is already doing, and what upstream > > packages will have to ultimately do anyways -- fix their code to work > > with libpng-1.5 when the API has been forcibly broken. > > Or you can mask libpng-1.5 since most users aren't interested in having > the latest version of something they won't be using directly. Wait > until packages have been fixed upstream. Then 8 months or a year later, > unmask it.
that isnt how we work -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
