Re: Windows and DLLs

["Jesse D. Sightler" <jsight pair com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Owen Taylor <otaylor@redhat.com>
To: Christopher Curtis <ccurtis@ee.fit.edu>
Cc: gnome-list@gnome.org <gnome-list@gnome.org>
Date: Thursday, October 01, 1998 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Windows and DLLs

>Christopher Curtis <ccurtis@ee.fit.edu> writes:
>
>> One of the problems people have now is with GTK+ and the GIMP.  The
>> problem here is that the GTK people aren't really following the rules.
>> GTK+ version 1.1 should be backwards compatible with GTK+ 1.0 (same major
>> version number), but have significant performance increases or new
>> widgets.  However, these problems are bound to appear during development
>> cycles so it's not wholly "their fault".  On the other hand, they seem to
>> be trying to imitate the linux kernel system of odd numbers being
>> development and even being stable - this does not work 100% for
libraries;
>> in that sense, they are doing it wrong and should properly change the
next
>> higher version number.  Then following that system, though, the scenario
>> changes to be that of even numbers (and zero) being development and odd
>> numbers being stable.
>>
>> Now, I'm not trying to criticize the GTK+ people - just trying to give an
>> example of how people are currently having problems and that there is a
>> solution that does not require reinventing a library system that has held
>> up for the past twenty years.
>
>$ ls /opt/themes/lib/*gtk*so*
>
> /opt/themes/lib/libgtk.so -> libgtk-1.1.so.2.0.0
> /opt/themes/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.0 -> libgtk-1.1.so.0.0.0
> /opt/themes/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.0.0.0
> /opt/themes/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.1 -> libgtk-1.1.so.1.0.0
> /opt/themes/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.1.0.0
> /opt/themes/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.2 -> libgtk-1.1.so.2.0.0
> /opt/themes/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.2.0.0
>
>$ ldd .libs/testgtk
>        libgtk-1.1.so.2 => /opt/themes/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.2 (0x40000000)
>
>$ ldd /usr/local/bin/gimp
>        libgtk-1.1.so.1 => /opt/themes/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.1 (0x40005000)
>[...]
>
>Hmmm, I seem to have programs that link and run fine against two
>different development versions of GTK+. Wonder why.... ;-)
>
>(Yes, we have a scheme, which isn't too different from what
>people normally do, which handles this fine. You are confusing
>the version number of the package with the version number
>of the library.)


I think the problem here is when RPM gets involved.  People doing "RPM -uvh
*.rpm" will tend to lose all of the older minor versions of a library,
causing all of their old apps to fail to function (as many of mine have).

This is a problem that had better be resolved before things start being
distributed with the purpose of giving them to end-users (which GNOME is
still not really ready for, IMO).

-----------
Jesse D. Sightler
http://www3.pair.com/jsight/