- 2012.01.22 17:17 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2012.01.22 19:54 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2012.01.22 20:42 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2012.01.23 01:48 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Jay Berkenbilt
- 2012.01.23 05:24 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Tom Lane
-
2012.01.23 15:13 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2012.01.23 15:52 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Jay Berkenbilt
- 2012.01.23 16:26 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Tom Lane
- 2012.01.23 17:48 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Jürgen_Buchmüller
-
2012.01.23 15:52 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Jay Berkenbilt
-
2012.01.23 01:48 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Jay Berkenbilt
-
2012.01.22 20:42 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Bob Friesenhahn
2012.01.23 14:04 "Re: [Tiff] update on tiff 4.x in debian", by Edward Lam
It's been awhile but since the last time I looked, the libtiff soname's were different by default. Have we fixed this in the default libtiff build yet?
ie. that "libtiff.so.<N>" has a default <N> value that is the same across major Linux distributions to mean the same major version of libtiff.
Thanks,
-Edward
On 23/01/2012 12:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Thanks so much for getting on this. I wish it had been on my radar prior to 4.0.0 too. Anyway, debian doesn't have 4.0.0 in unstable yet, and it doesn't matter whether we break compatibility with what's in experimental. I'd be really surprised if Fedora has it either.
Nope, Fedora does not have it yet. My plan is to wait for the F-18 cycle to begin, not so much because of libtiff itself as because I figure I already caused enough trouble in F-17 with bumping libpng. So from the Red Hat end of things, incompatible changes in 4.0.1 are fine. I'd like it to happen within a couple of months though...