On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 08:36:11PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On 09/24/2012 05:07 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 03:52:55PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>Hi, > >> > >>On 09/20/2012 11:42 PM, Pete Batard wrote: > >>>Hi, > >>> > >>>It with pleasure that I would like to announce the release of libusbx > >>>1.0.13. This version brings the following notable changes: > >> > >>The Fedora packages for libusbx have been upgraded to 1.0.13 now. > > > >How did you handle the usbutils breakage? > > I did not handle it at all, as I was not aware of it. Now that I'm I'll > file a bug against usbutils and advice the maintainer to add the > necessary #ifdef-ery to keep it building. So, you are going to force me (hint, I'm the usbutils maintainer), to change my code because libusbx broke their API here? That's what other distros have already tried to tell me earlier today, and I'm going to push back hard and say that it is a bug in libusbx instead. > Note that other then breaking building from source, Hint, that's a huge thing, as that is exactly who the users of a library are. If I can't build against the library, how can I use it at run-time (ok, yes, you can drop it in later, but really, that's just foolish...) > this does not impact end users at all, as the ABI is unchanged. We > have been very careful to keep the ABI 100% compatible and I can > guarantee you that we will keep doing that in the future! Um, no, you just broke the API, my inbox is proof of that. All the distros just reported this to me, and as such, it's an API change in your library, not anything I should have to do in my code. Please fix this in libusbx, or bump the .so name so that tools can properly know that the API has changed, and that they want to build against the old one. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
