Re: Discussion: unixODBC - move unversioned *.so files back to unixODBC-devel package

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



* Tom Hughes via devel:

> On 11/09/2020 07:13, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
>
>> There seemed to be no big reason for moving the libraries to the
>> main package in the past, so I consider f34 as a good candidate for
>> such a change. It would be great, if  you share your opinions and
>> concerns for this topic.
>
> Tom Lane has explained the reason on the ticket, it's because the
> library is often dlopened by a client application instead of being
> linked to.

Yes, that is sufficient reason not to do the move.  Third-party
applications will break.  Some people also really dislike installing
*-devel packages in production, so there might not be an easy fix for
them.

The library probably should not have a versioned soname in the first
place, with backwards compatibility achieved by different means.  But
that does not matter now.

Thanks,
Florian
-- 
Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux