On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 08:07:56PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 10:53:00AM -0500, Adam Heath wrote: > > In this case, libexif8 -> libexif9, this is a major soname bump, so should > > have required a new source package. The maintainer was probably derelict in > > this case. > > Uh, no. Changing the binary package name the way we've always > handled soname changes, except with a small number of very popular > libraries. It's a lot less work, and it doesn't require creating a > new package that will be orphaned almost instantly. If it turns out > to be a problem for a particular library, and oldlibs package can > be created for it afterwards, when the need for it has been demonstrated. > > Richard Braakman
Amen. -- Christophe Barbé <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GnuPG FingerPrint: E0F6 FADF 2A5C F072 6AF8 F67A 8F45 2F1E D72C B41E Cats are intented to teach us that not everything in nature has a function. --Garrison Keillor