On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 09:17:01AM -0600, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 08:06:33PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:36:24 +1100
> > Mark Purcell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > My question still remains. If we require a big recompile, when/ how are
> > > we
On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 08:06:33PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:36:24 +1100
> Mark Purcell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My question still remains. If we require a big recompile, when/ how are we
> > going to bother to advise the maintainers of these packages? It has been
On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 01:06:21PM +0100, Noel Koethe wrote:
> On Mit, 02 Jan 2002, Mark Purcell wrote:
>
> > > That's the problem; there is just no real solution besides a big
> > > recompile.
> >
> > My question still remains. If we require a big recompile, when/ how are we
> > going to bothe
On Mit, 02 Jan 2002, Mark Purcell wrote:
> > That's the problem; there is just no real solution besides a big
> > recompile.
>
> My question still remains. If we require a big recompile, when/ how are we
> going to bother to advise the maintainers of these packages? It has been
> stated that w
On Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:36:24 +1100
Mark Purcell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My question still remains. If we require a big recompile, when/ how are we
> going to bother to advise the maintainers of these packages? It has been
> stated that we are talking about 300+ packages :-(
Mass NMU, setti
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
>
> That's the problem; there is just no real solution besides a big
> recompile.
My question still remains. If we require a big recompile, when/ how are we
going to bother to advise the maintainers
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The problem appears to be that libqt2 now links to libpng3 rather than
> libpng2. When the dynamic linker loads a QT-dependent application still
> linked against libpng2, it overrides libqt2's png symbols with the png
> symbols defined in the application,
* Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020101 15:44]:
> > > binary packages built from kdeutils depend on libpng directly. Why?
> >
> > I can only guess, but I heard that are systems where an shared library
> > can not depent on other shared libraries so the application has to
> > link against all. P
On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 03:41:54PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020101 15:08]:
> > I'm also a little confused by why so many KDE applications link to
> > libpng directly. Picking kdeutils at random, the only instances of
> > 'png_' or 'png.h' anywhere in the
* Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020101 15:08]:
> I'm also a little confused by why so many KDE applications link to
> libpng directly. Picking kdeutils at random, the only instances of
> 'png_' or 'png.h' anywhere in the source tree are in
> admin/acinclude.m4.in, yet -lpng is on the link line
On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 07:39:07PM +1100, Mark Purcell wrote:
> Btw, this appears to be a major backwards incompatibily problem
> between libpng2 -> 3 which effects lots and lots of packages.
> The solution is rather simple, requiring recompilation to
> get the correct linkage to libpng3, but it wo
On Tue, 1 Jan 2002 21:25:24 +1100
Mark Purcell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The incompatibility as I see it from here is that any application
> which depends on libpng2, is only good with libpng2 <= 1.0.12-2 and
> upon recompiling will be dependant on libpng3.
>
> libqt 2.3.1-18 has been recompil
On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 06:50:03PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2002 19:39:07 +1100 Mark Purcell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The solution is rather simple, requiring recompilation to
> > get the correct linkage to libpng3, but it would of been nice to
> > see some dicussion on
13 matches
Mail list logo
