On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 04:40:20PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 08:27:13AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > Rightly or wrongly, upstream libfoo-1.0 has some additional utilities that > > access the PrivateData. Because the utilities are built from the libfoo > > source, they can include the fooprivate.h header file and do this. When > > libfoo goes to 1.0.1, upstream changes the definition of PrivateData and > > updates the utilities to work with the new datastructure. Since the public > > ABI stayed the same, the SONAME doesn't change and external programs > > compiled against libfoo-1.0 continue to work but the utilities built as > > a subpackage would be broken without stricter versioning. > > Upstream can change the ABI as much as they want without bumping the > SONAME providing that the old interfaces are also present. It's entirely > possible to end up with a situation where external binaries built > against 1.0.1 won't run on 1.0.0 - the problem isn't limited to > subpackages. > Sure. But in this case, upstream isn't changing the public ABI. It's a different level of mistake that's being practiced here. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpzAINw6xXs7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
