RE: [libxml++] static libio

[Murray Cumming Comneon com]

> Le sam 06/12/2003 à 15:45, Murray Cumming Comneon com a écrit :
> > Yes, you should wait for API stability instead of confusing 
> everyone 
> > who tries to install libxml++. It will happen very soon now.
> > 
> > In the meantime, your problems seems to be that the 
> libxml++ in debian 
> > seems old. Bug the debian mantainer about that. I can't 
> believe that 
> > they would hold back a libxml++ version just because another 
> > application depends on it. An unstable API is an unstable 
> API, and no 
> > application should expect to hold back all other applications just 
> > because they are too lazy to track the API changes.
> 
> Aren't you contradicting yourself here? You said wait for the 
> stable api and than said that the libxml++ in debian is too old?

I am saying
A) wait for API stability if this is a problem for you, and if you can not
solve problem B)

B) debian seems to be giving you version 0.23. But the current version is
0.27. Clearly the version in debian is too old. Please talk to the debian
package maintainer about problems with his package. Please tell him to talk
to us if he disagrees with me.

> > > > This should be completely analogous to libraries such 
> as gtk+. You 
> > > > do n=
> > ot
> > > > need different versions of gtk+ 2.2 installed, apart from the 
> > > > unpleasan=
> > t
> > > > stuff with the different versions of gcc, of course.
> > >
> > > I am not sure it's a good example. On my system, I have 
> both gtk+ v1 
> > > and
> > gtk+ v2 installed.
> > 
> > Yes. You have gtk+ 1.2 and gtk+ 2.2. These are separate, 
> > parallel-installable APIs. But you do not have Both gtk+ 2.2.1 and 
> > gtk+ 2.2.2, because the API/ABI is stable, so replacing
> > gtk+ 2.2.1 with gtk+ 2.2.2 does not break anything.
> 
> I could give you the example of libgal but I am not sure it 
> would convinced you. 

libgal is also an unstable API, I think, and all applications that use it
expect to update quickly to the new API. 

I would be interested to hear specific details of that in debian, if you can
point me to URLs that describe particular solutions.
 
[snip]
> If you look at the content you will see that only 
> /usr/lib/libio.so.0* does not mention libxml++ and the soname 
> 13.

I don't think we should be installing any such library. That's clearly
stupid. I think it's something that will be fixed in the next version, very
soon now, as I said.

> So it will prevent the installation of libxml++14 along 
> libxml++13 (because both are likely to contain 
> /usr/lib/libio.so.0.0.0). 
[snip]

Murray Cumming
www.murrayc.com
murrayc usa net