On Pá, 2014-02-28 at 14:51 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 19:37 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 28 February 2014 15:38, Tomas Mraz <tmraz(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > This should not break builds of any reasonably current software.
> libgcrypt.so.11()(64bit) is needed by (installed)
> I guess not much we can do there, other than maintain a compat package
> -- right? :(
Since google-chrome-stable is not part of the distribution I do not see
why we should keep a compat package.
OTOH important libraries that still break soname instead of using symbol
versioning in 2014 really make me frown loudly...
I'm sorry but this is not glibc and the thing that was dropped is an
long ago deprecated API which simply cannot be supported by the codebase
anymore if it wanted to evolve reasonably. Adding it only as fake API
calls which would fail would not help much I suppose.
The problem is that when a library API is written from scratch it is
sometimes unavoidable to make mistakes in the design of the API that for
any reasonable further development of the library the API calls have to
Of course once the API becomes mature such API call drops should be
avoided if possible.
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
(You'll never know whether the road is wrong though.)