Am Dienstag, 19. Juni 2012, 15:47:54 schrieb Richard Guenther:
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a
Quoting Richard Guenther <rguenther(a)suse.de>de>:
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 19.06.2012 14:15, Richard Guenther wrote:
> I don't see why "manual" is bad. In fact we should be perfectly
> about an ABI/API change _before_ we check things in. Being ignorant
> and relying on automatic rebuilds "fixing" things is even worse
> than a concious "manual" rebuild.
Aehm, who is perfectly aware of ABI changes?
I invite you to review e.g.
ABI change or not?
No ABI change by definition as the SONAME does not change.
That's assuming that upstream knows what they do...
and NEVER miss out on anything.
Yes, and you only detect if that is true (and
thus detect bugs)
if you actually _not_ rebuild $world after Qt 4.8.2.
Do we WANT to run into that? knowing that this results in random crashes? Yes,
of course, SONAME should be bumped by upstreams if that happens.
Well, while we are able to "fix" issues in the packages we build ourselves
(only if you stay inside a single repository!) there are people who
build their own stuff - and you'd break their binaries.
So YES! We DO want to run into this.
While I agree that we want to learn about incompatibilities, I disagree that this must
happen in Factory.
Also coolo wants to know _before_ accepting a submission set to Factory if it breaks
something. And this is not limited to c libraries.
So when you want to know if something affects compile or runtime in a negative, you have
no choice but you have to rebuild everything in such "candiate" projects (and
QA over them in best case). It is another question if you really need to move also all
build binaries into factory afterwards ...
SUSE Linux Products GmbH
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org