On 12.1.2010 01:14, Kevin Kofler wrote: > semantics) hitting so many packages is a very bad idea and that it's > unrealistic to get them all fixed for F13. + 1...speaking as somebody who's fixed dozens of packages after the F11 and F12 mass rebuilds and looking at the loooooong list referenced above (about a double of what failed in F12). Also I have really doubts what concerns upstreamability of the necessary changes in packages. Especially if other distributions will (???) continue shipping ld with the traditional semantics, this means hours of headache discussions with upstream not willing to accept the patch. And...sorry for a stupid question: is there any other benefit than the one described in the wiki? Because otherwise I'm really wondering whether this pays off. How often does this happen that an application gets broken due to a removal of implicitly linked library in a required package? Any statistics or reports e.g. from BZ? I don't have the skills to assess the impact and need of this -- but still some more consideration on such a change (which means huge amount of work on the side of packagers -- or at least should mean, provided everybody will follow the "WhyUpstream" policy) would be appreciated. Regards, Milos -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
