Subject: Re: Shared object questions.
To: Richard Rauch <email@example.com>
From: David Brownlee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/24/1999 11:16:17
On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Richard Rauch wrote:
> This would make more sense if the GIMP (the raison d'etre for the gtk,
> right?) were up to date, but some of the "3rd party" applications were
> not. Instead, it's the other way around: The GIMP is in the group that's
> lagging. Or is the GIMP a fractured project?
The development version of the gimp uses the latest toolkit.
The stable version is still on gtk1.0.
> In any case, this doesn't really provide a technical reason. Free
> software on my previous system (a dearly departed Amiga) did not seem to
> have such problems. Of course, it is entirely possible that I am seeing
> the past through emerald glasses.
> Still, at leat it provides a partial answer: Yes, the libraries are in the
> same lineage; and presumably yes, _normally_ shared libraries are not so
> version-sensitive, but the gtk library happens to be an exception.
Generally if compatability is retained you increment the minor
number. When you chaneg the API you increment the major number.
It is easy to have multiple shared libraries installed and
have apps use the appropriate one.
The problem with pkgsrc is we install all the headers for
compiling as well, which would conflict by default, hence needing
someone to come up with a renaming scheme to make it all work.
-=- "I know its not the right thing, and I know its not the good thing" -=-