| Steve Langasek 2004-07-23, 5:53 pm |
| [redirecting to debian-devel for further discussion]
On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 10:53:26AM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> As I see it, the question boils down to whether the added fact that
> partial woody upgrades and third party software linked with libtiff
> could be affected is sufficient to make us want to go through the pain
> of an ABI reversion. I would still maintain that it isn't, especially
> since it's likely that the affected applications are limited to those
> for which release-critical bugs have been reported.
Changing the ABI without changing the SONAME is an RC bug. The fact
that the software currently in sarge/sid has made it over this hump
doesn't change that. For a lesser-used library, it might have been ok
to let this slide, but I'm sure there are third-party binaries available
that use libtiff. Debian has always made a point to get these
transitions right, and this one should be no exception.
I'm dismayed that this bug wasn't addressed sooner. It is very possible
at this point that fixing this will delay the release. That's
unfortunate, but I don't believe it's something we can dispense with.
The best solution, without causing more segfaults along the way, is to
change the SONAME to match the change in ABI. Reverting the ABI would
only cause more pain; the only way out is through.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
|