Re: Fading away an old ABI transition

2011-06-19 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO En cette soirée bien amorcée du dimanche 19 juin 2011, vers 22:38, Peter Samuelson disait : >> Or is it better to keep this prefix until a new major version >> (unlikely to happen)? > Maybe ask the maintainers of the 'zlib1g' package for advice. That 'g' > suffix is from an ABI transition

Re: Fading away an old ABI transition

2011-06-19 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Vincent Bernat] > Or is it better to keep this prefix until a new major version > (unlikely to happen)? Maybe ask the maintainers of the 'zlib1g' package for advice. That 'g' suffix is from an ABI transition in September 1997. (: In all seriousness, Julien is right - this is not worth a packa

Re: Fading away an old ABI transition

2011-06-19 Thread Julien Cristau
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 15:47:07 +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > Hi! > > I maintain libsmi2 which ships libsmi2ldbl binary package which is the > result of a transition started more than four years ago. I am wondering > if I should do something to get rid of the "ldbl" prefix? Should I make N

Fading away an old ABI transition

2011-06-19 Thread Vincent Bernat
Hi! I maintain libsmi2 which ships libsmi2ldbl binary package which is the result of a transition started more than four years ago. I am wondering if I should do something to get rid of the "ldbl" prefix? Should I make a transition package (which means keeping it until wheezy is out)? Sh