From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Po2MQ-0005Dx-0N for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:25:10 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BE841E0AFD; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:25:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5D0E0AD0 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:24:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EABCF1B400F for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:24:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.521 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.521 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.078, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GsRKniXZWzoa for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:24:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 002251B4028 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:24:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Po2LY-0002c3-Bs for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 00:24:16 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 00:24:16 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 00:24:16 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: libpng-1.5 smooth upgrade Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:24:06 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <4D556603.8040400@gentoo.org> <4D5568A7.2000602@gentoo.org> <201102111651.18298.aballier@gentoo.org> <1297454870.2150.14.camel@raven.home.flameeyes.eu> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies; GIT 25ed40d branch-testing) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 437ce62e50a8db052c096ce22f362b35 Matt Turner posted on Fri, 11 Feb 2011 20:39:04 +0000 as excerpted: > I'm a little unclear about -lpng vs -lpng15. ssuominen tells me on IRC > that probably 90% of packages linking with libpng will fail with 1.5. > These 90% will link with -lpng until a version that supports 1.5 is > released? The remaining 10% will go ahead and link with -lpng15? What > happens when 1.6 is released and breaks compatibility again? That last is my first thought as well. If we go ahead and patch a whole bunch of stuff to -lpng15, we're locking= =20 ourselves in to screwing with them for 1.6 and beyond, as well. It seems= =20 to me that if we're going to patch, patch the real problem, so -lpng=20 continues to work, and then we'll only be forced to fix what breaks with=20 1.6 when it comes out, not everything we broke by locking it to 1.5=20 specifically, as well. But I'm not the one doing the patching, so... --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman