Re: Re: GNU Aspell 0.60 Released

On Thu, 9 Sep 2004, Brian Nelson wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 09:59:32PM -0600, Kevin Atkinson wrote:
> 
> > Earlier you mentioned the problem of installing both Aspell 0.50 and 
> > Aspell 0.60 due to the fact that I chose not to increment the so-name.  I 
> > have attempted to remedy this situation by adding an compile time option 
> > to increment the so-name.  Have you looked into this possibility?
> 
> I've thought about it, but I think it's better (for Debian anyway) to
> keep the soname the same.  Changing the soname would require rebuilding
> of all packages using the library (~30 or so) and the dictionaries,
> whereas keeping the soname would only require rebuilding the
> dictionaries.

No Problem, if you think that is better.  

> The transition could be gradual since the libaspell15 and the new
> library (libaspell16?) could coexist, but I don't think there's much
> benefit to keeping two libraries around.  

Yes it is libaspell16.  I also added the ability to create a backwards 
compatibility library which simply links with libaspell16 for applications 
expecting libaspell16.

I don't care either way.  I just want to make sure you know what you 
options are.


-- 
http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org