On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 05:20:31PM +0200, Matthew Brincke wrote: > Debian bug 854600 [2], I wonder why no one answered to the last post ...)
My fault. TBH, I totally forgot of that. I suppose I could have come up with simple patch to retain ABI compatibility on my own, but I forgot and I haven't than that. > I wonder why changing a private method is relevant to ABI at all, and > (at least when you're still unconvinced ;-) to accept) would welcome your > elucidation (if you have come across any, to date), please ... There is a more widespread problem in podofo where all symbols are exported and therefore are formally part of the public ABI (even if not intended to). Even if I suppose no program within Debian uses those symbols (I could check, I haven't), I would not happily break the ABI nonetheless. https://sourceforge.net/p/podofo/mailman/message/35819398/ (then, the lack of an actual bug tracker makes those request/reports very hard to track, and I wouldn't be surprised if many missed it, or even if they did completely forgot about it, as many other reports) -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ Podofo-users mailing list Podofo-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/podofo-users
