Stefan Sperling wrote:
> OK, so in this case I would prefer if distros patched Subversion accordingly.
If packagers for other binary-based distros (e.g., OpenSUSE, Fedora,
Cygwin) do not also want a change like this, then it seems sane enough
to keep it a private patch.
On the other hand, if the
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 07:28:07AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 29, 2011 6:45 AM, "Jonathan Nieder"
> > wrote:
>
> >> The actual ABI compatibility of sqlite3 doesn't depend on the patchlevel
> >> (the x in 3.7.x),
> >
> > [citation needed]
> >
> >
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> On Saturday, October 29, 2011 6:45 AM, "Jonathan Nieder"
> wrote:
>> The actual ABI compatibility of sqlite3 doesn't depend on the patchlevel
>> (the x in 3.7.x),
>
> [citation needed]
>
> (I already searched sqlite.org for "ABI" and "binary compatibility" and so
> on; ze
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 06:45:50AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> [[[
>> The actual ABI compatibility of sqlite3 doesn't depend on the patchlevel
>> (the x in 3.7.x), so stop being picky about the patchlevel when checking
>> the version number at runtime. This avoids sp
On Saturday, October 29, 2011 6:45 AM, "Jonathan Nieder"
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch is taken from Debian's subversion packaging. It avoids
> having to rebuild Subversion each time an older or newer patchlevel of
> SQLite gets installed (i.e., the x in 3.7.x changes). I'd appreciate
> any th
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 06:45:50AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch is taken from Debian's subversion packaging. It avoids
> having to rebuild Subversion each time an older or newer patchlevel of
> SQLite gets installed (i.e., the x in 3.7.x changes). I'd appreciate
> any thoug
6 matches
Mail list logo
