On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 04:37:17PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
> >> "SMR" == Steve M Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The fact remains that we cannot change the linkage of the library
> > NOR of applications piecemeal. The changes must be coordinated.
> > In the absence of a transition
"Steve M. Robbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:23:25PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
> > >> "SMR" == Steve M Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:09:08PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >> I really want t
Hi,
FWIW, the solution we're planning for Red Hat is to create a symlink
"libpng10.so" to the old libpng, then link imlib and gnome-libs
against -lpng10. This way the ABI of imlib/gnome-libs is preserved,
but -lpng can be moved to libpng3.
I'll attach the imlib and gnome-libs patches. (This step
>> "SMR" == Steve M Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 04:37:17PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
[...]
>> See Colin's answer. Change the library soname and shlibs. This will
>> solve this bug.
> It's a reasonable transition plan.
> However, introducing a new imlib
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 04:37:17PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
> >> "SMR" == Steve M Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> > The fact remains that we cannot change the linkage of the library
> > NOR of applications piecemeal. The changes must be coordinated.
> > In the absence o
On 09 Jan 2002 15:09:08 +0100
Christian Marillat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Now, the question is: should GNOME move to libpng3, and how? The QT/KDE
> > folks have sidestepped the problem by declaring that libqt2 is
> > remaining linked against libpng2, while libqt3 links with libpng3. I
> >
>> "SMR" == Steve M Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> The fact remains that we cannot change the linkage of the library
> NOR of applications piecemeal. The changes must be coordinated.
> In the absence of a transition plan, I see no reason to introduce
> instability in GNOME by chang
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:23:25PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
> >> "SMR" == Steve M Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:09:08PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> I really want to know why recompiling gdk-imlib1 is too hard ?
>
> > Recompili
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:09:08PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
> reassign 128377 gdk-imlib1
> thanks
>
> > Now, the question is: should GNOME move to libpng3, and how? The QT/KDE
> > folks have sidestepped the problem by declaring that libqt2 is
> > remaining linked against libpng2, while li
>> "SMR" == Steve M Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:09:08PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
[...]
>> I really want to know why recompiling gdk-imlib1 is too hard ?
> Recompiling isn't hard. Managing the transition is hard. Did you
> read the threads in debian
reassign 128377 gdk-imlib1
thanks
>> "SMR" == Steve M Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> reassign 128377 gnome-help
> thanks
> Hi Folks,
> GNOME's imlib1 library is linked with libpng2, and nobody
> knows how to gracefully handle the change from libpng2-->libpng3
> http://lists.debian.org
11 matches
Mail list logo