From: Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org>
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: packaging the add-on libs...
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 11:14:18 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vg490x7p.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021011094150.GA3235@www> (tomas@fabula.de's message of "Fri, 11 Oct 2002 11:41:50 +0200")
tomas@fabula.de writes:
>> It's been stated that we're going to keep all the directly linkable
>> libs in the "normal place".
>
> Yes, I know (that's why I know I was taking risks ;-). I felt uneasy
> then and still feel uneasy abut it (see below).
Actually, one other thing I wanted to mention (and have already
mentioned to Marius).
Even though this library issue seems to me like a potentially serious
impediment to being able to upgrade from one version of guile to
another gracefully, especially if guile has a lot of add-on libs
provided by third parties, after talking to Bill, it seems that
although going with libguile12-foo-bar would be likely fix the problem
for guile, it still wouldn't address the same problem for all the
other non-guile libs on the system. i.e. what about opengl, libc, X
etc.
So I'm wondering if perhaps I'm just coming to fully apprehend what is
in fact a common unix problem (when inter-library dependencies are
involved), one that people just don't think about very often, and one
that perhaps it's not guile's job to fix.
Not sure. What do others think?
The problem is that if we don't do anything, there *will* likely be
trouble if we release guile-XY, with a new major version of libguile
and the system has some library or app blarg that depends on
libguile-someones-foo and libguile-someone-elses-bar. If lib*foo gets
upgraded on the system before lib*bar does, then blarg will likely end
up being indirectly linked against 2 different major versions of
libguile until a new major version of lib*bar is released.
I was hoping we could avoid intermediate brokenness like that, but
perhaps we can't. I guess in debian that would just mean another one
of those periods during a major interpreter migration where things are
very shaky.
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C 64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-11 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-10 5:03 packaging the add-on libs Rob Browning
2002-10-10 7:12 ` tomas
2002-10-10 15:22 ` Rob Browning
2002-10-11 9:41 ` tomas
2002-10-11 15:59 ` Rob Browning
2002-10-14 11:34 ` tomas
2002-10-11 16:14 ` Rob Browning [this message]
2002-10-11 17:10 ` Greg Troxel
2002-10-11 18:26 ` Rob Browning
2002-10-11 20:37 ` Greg Troxel
2002-10-10 12:51 ` Greg Troxel
2002-10-10 15:37 ` Rob Browning
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87vg490x7p.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org \
--to=rlb@defaultvalue.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).