From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RQQoU-0002Ya-6u for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 22:45:06 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pAFLcfK8030874; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 21:38:41 GMT Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 30133-08; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 21:38:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pAFLcVrm030868 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 15 Nov 2011 21:38:32 GMT Message-ID: <1321393116.26881.229.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Saul Wold Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 21:38:36 +0000 In-Reply-To: <4EC2B797.4010503@linux.intel.com> References: <1320761883.10843.40.camel@ted> <4EC2B797.4010503@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.1- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] Recipe upgrades, fixes and additions X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 21:45:06 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 11:03 -0800, Saul Wold wrote: > On 11/08/2011 06:18 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 16:10 -0800, Joshua Lock wrote: > >> All, > >> > >> Here's a series of patches I developed whilst trying to play around with some > >> Clutter based software. > >> > >> The interesting pieces may be: > >> Clutter 1.8 series recipes - do we want/need to keep clutter 1.6 around? > >> Are we OK with continuing to namespace the clutter recipes by clutter > >> version? > > > > Yes, I think this makes sense. > > Why do we want to continue the clutter the namespace with version > numbers? Was this not for a past issue with mis-matched API/ABI? > > If that problem is solved, then next remove that version info. Clutter produces libraries with a very specific namespace so you can parallel install clutter 1.4, 1.6 and 1.8. Applications compile against a given version of the library. Having the major lib version as part of the package name therefore makes sense. There aren't a lot of projects that do this but this one does and it continues to make sense to namespace it accordingly. Cheers, Richard