Re: wlroots backport?

18.08.2023 02:47, Nick Hastings пишет:
> Hi Michael,
> 
> * Michael Tokarev <[email protected]> [230815 02:55]:
>>
>> There's an issue with wlroots and backporting: it is the soname of libwlroots
>> library.
> 
> can you please explain or point me to an existing explanation of this
> problem?
> 
> I'm curious because I have backported wlroots 0.16.2 from testing/unstable
> to bookworm. The produced libwlroots-dev and libwlroots11 packages seem
> to happily coexist with the libwlroots10 that ships with bookworm.

There you go, this is where the problem is.  By just back-porting wlroots,
you gain nothing for bookworm, the back-ported lib isn't being used by
anything, until...

>> We don't gain much by backporting just the wlroots, the users of
>> the library has to be rebuild or backported too.
> 
> With the backported wlroots I'm able to backport sway from
> testing/unstable and also able to build/package/use the latest version
> of my wayland compositor of choice[1,2]. These backports required no
> modifications to the source packages.

..until something *else* is backported too which uses the backported
wlroots, like sway.  So basically, if we're about backporting this,
we should think about backporting, for example, sway, with wlroots
as a pre-dependency, not wlroots alone.  *That* will make sense.
Backporting wlroots by itself does not.

/mjt