How about major and minor releases

[Anthony Joseph Seward]

On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 07:35, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 09:04, Bill Anderson wrote:
> > I had 1.5 and 2.x installed in parallel, no problems. The problem I had
> > lied in the fact that RH's python-based tools called /usr/bin/python.
> > When added python2, I edited the RH python tools to run
> > /usr/bin/python1.5 instead and merrily went on my way. Indeed, those
> > systems are *still* running that way w/o issue. :)
> 
> Yes, but a working upstream parallel install setup would mean you didn't
> have to change any tools, it should all just keep working. ;-)
> 

Or it could mean that the tools had a bug in them: '#! /usr/bin/python' 
as a first line rather than the proper '#! /usr/bin/python1.5'.

> Look at how GTK is set up; it installs to names with version number in
> them, and all apps compiling vs. GTK always include the version number
> in the library name they ask for.

Just as python was installed with it's version in the name.  The problem
was that RH python scripts did not include the version number when they
asked for python.  I wrote a script (in python of course) to fix this
when I installed RH.  All that it did was look for python scripts and
make sure that the first line asked for the specific version of python
that was installed with that version of RH.

>  If we added GTK+ 3 today with a
> different ABI, no changes whatsoever would be required to GTK+ 2 or any
> of the apps using it.
> 
> If Python punts this to the distribution or local installation, then
> either we have to name things in nonstandard ways and get flamed for
> changing the upstream ABI, or we have to break the ABI shipped with the
> distribution in order to move to the unmodified upstream ABI.
> 
> The basic reason people don't do parallel install is simply that they
> think "/usr/bin/python2" looks ugly compared to "/usr/bin/python"
> 
> Would it make sense to have a symlink /usr/lib/libimageloader.so that
> pointed to libjpeg prior to some date and libpng after some date? That's
> what you're doing if you take an existing executable name and make it
> refer to an incompatible executable. "Just partially incompatible"
> doesn't matter, apps don't "just partially crash" when they try to use
> it.
> 
> Havoc
> 
> 
> --
> fedora-test-list mailing list
> fedora-test-list at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
-- 
Anthony Joseph Seward <anthony.seward at ieee.org>