On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:49:12 -0500, Toshio <toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm also still waiting to see why the current de facto scheme of: > current = libname > previous = libname[Version] > > is _compellingly_ wrong... Perhaps there just needs to be a summary of > Pros and Cons so we can see the tradeoffs. If i understand the argument that people are making... is that doing it this way... is a burden on 3rd party packagers who have to try to predict when and if Core is going to introduce a libname[Version] for previous versions. And by association also a burden on users who are trying to use applications from outside of current Core that still need the older libs for applications until a 3rd party is able to rebuild a package with the older libs or the application developers retool to support the new library. My counter argument is that doing it this way historically has provided a mechanism by which Core(and rhl before it) explicitly and delibrately chooses to expire older libraries that Core is no longer maintaining and is no longer needed by anything inside Core. Another argument which has been made for continuing in this fashion is that standardizing on using sonames in all library packages potentially lowers the bar to backward-compatibility cruft. Such libraries would linger in an unknown maintainership state and be difficult to drop at any point because there will always be users who are using legacy application that needs that legacy library. -jef
