Re: how to handle a gui- and non-gui-version of the same library/soname

2010-01-22 Thread Al Dunsmuir
Hello Milos, Monday, January 18, 2010, 2:27:22 PM, you wrote: > is there any good way how to handle the situation described at > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528524 > > ? > > I.e. you have a single library (single soname) which can be compiled > with or without GUI support (with d

Re: how to handle a gui- and non-gui-version of the same library/soname

2010-01-18 Thread Milos Jakubicek
On 18.1.2010 13:17, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 01/17/2010 09:04 AM, Milos Jakubicek wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> is there any good way how to handle the situation described at >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528524 >> >> ? >> >> I.

Re: how to handle a gui- and non-gui-version of the same library/soname

2010-01-18 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/17/2010 09:04 AM, Milos Jakubicek wrote: > Hi all, > > is there any good way how to handle the situation described at > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528524 > > ? > > I.e. you have a single library (single soname) which can be

how to handle a gui- and non-gui-version of the same library/soname

2010-01-17 Thread Milos Jakubicek
Hi all, is there any good way how to handle the situation described at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528524 ? I.e. you have a single library (single soname) which can be compiled with or without GUI support (with different ABI) -- and we'd like to have both of them, of course --