On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Mikkel L. Ellertson <mikkel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Normally, you only need to recompile if there is a major version in > the library. If it is a minor version change, it is supposed to be > backward compatible. This maybe expected for libraries which advertises a stable API, but its not a hard and fast rule for all libraries..especially for libraries which do not advertise themselves as stable. Do we have an accurate accounting of which upstream library projects consider their API stable and follow the soname conventions? Or do we just assume they are? Take xulrunner for example, only a subset of the functions it exports for applications to use are considered stable. This is the reason why xulrunner has a -devel and a -devel-unstable subpackage. Any application which is making use of xulrunner function calls which are identified as unstable...will need to be rebuilt with each and every minor revision of xulrunner to ensure proper operation...regardless of the soname changes on the library. This is why every time there is a xulrunner update, a flurry of additional application packages are rebuilt and pushed as well. -jef -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
