Hi László,
On 9/26/24 21:12, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 9:46 PM Bernd Schubert
> wrote:
>> I would like to ask how painful is a library (libfuse) .so for a
>> distribution?
> In what sense? Upstream ABI breakages don't help, I wait for 3.17 at
> least if that helps
On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 9:46 PM Bernd Schubert
wrote:
> I would like to ask how painful is a library (libfuse) .so for a
> distribution?
In what sense? Upstream ABI breakages don't help, I wait for 3.17 at
least if that helps - not upgrading it to middle versions.
> As you can see here https://g
On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 12:48:03AM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > I would like to ask how painful is a library (libfuse) .so for a
> > > distribution?
> >
> > Not at all, if all revdeps build fine with the bumped version.
> >
> > "I'm assuming that distributions do not recompile packages again
On Thu, 2024-09-26 at 01:31 +0500, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 09:38:26PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> > I would like to ask how painful is a library (libfuse) .so for a
> > distribution?
>
> Not at all, if all revdeps build fine with the bumped version.
>
> "I'm assumi
On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 09:38:26PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> I would like to ask how painful is a library (libfuse) .so for a
> distribution?
Not at all, if all revdeps build fine with the bumped version.
"I'm assuming that distributions do not recompile packages against a new
library versio
5 matches
Mail list logo