On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 06:30:19PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
[My apologies in advance for the cross-posting.]
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:42:36AM +0100, Daniel Wallin wrote:
Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
So, I've been trying to build the Debian package with the latest from
the 0.8
* Roberto C. Sánchez [Tue, 10 Mar 2009 18:30:19 -0400]:
I am curious as to what people generally think of how the libluabind
SONAME will be going forward. I know that certain packages (like
libssl) have the complete version in the SONAME, but I can't imagine
that this is a really good idea.
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:18:59PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Roberto C. Sánchez [Tue, 10 Mar 2009 18:30:19 -0400]:
I am curious as to what people generally think of how the libluabind
SONAME will be going forward. I know that certain packages (like
libssl) have the complete version
* Roberto C. Sánchez [Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:34:20 -0400]:
It’s certainly not desirable. Do you have an estimation of how many
reverse dependencies libluabind will have? Goswin’s remark about API
compatibility is also an important one.
Currently, none of the luabind packages have reverse
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:39:37PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Roberto C. Sánchez [Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:34:20 -0400]:
It’s certainly not desirable. Do you have an estimation of how many
reverse dependencies libluabind will have? Goswin’s remark about API
compatibility is also an
Roberto C. Sánchez robe...@connexer.com writes:
[My apologies in advance for the cross-posting.]
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:42:36AM +0100, Daniel Wallin wrote:
Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
So, I've been trying to build the Debian package with the latest from
the 0.8 branch on github. It
6 matches
Mail list logo
