1 |
Well, many times you can't really anticipate everything. |
2 |
|
3 |
I had my libreoffice-bin pdf import broken for two months because some |
4 |
shared library had got upgraded against which it wasn't linked. |
5 |
|
6 |
(excuse for top post, typing from mobile) |
7 |
|
8 |
-- |
9 |
Nilesh Govindrajan |
10 |
http://nileshgr.com |
11 |
On Jan 31, 2013 5:38 PM, "Nuno Silva" <nunojsilva@×××××××.pt> wrote: |
12 |
|
13 |
> On 2013-01-31, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote: |
14 |
> |
15 |
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> |
16 |
> wrote: |
17 |
> >> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Yohan Pereira |
18 |
> >> <yohan.pereira@×××××.com> wrote: |
19 |
> >>> On 30/01/13 at 11:09pm, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote: |
20 |
> >>>> Since Gentoo updates libraries very quickly, I'm wondering if it is |
21 |
> >>>> safe to use the binary version? Has anyone faced library breakages on |
22 |
> >>>> this? |
23 |
> >>>> |
24 |
> >>>> Chromium is easily recompiled with new libraries and you don't have a |
25 |
> >>>> broken browser, which won't really be the case with the binary |
26 |
> >>>> version. |
27 |
> >>> |
28 |
> >>> I've used the binary version (google-chrome) for a while and never |
29 |
> >>> had any breakages. I guess if there's a library update that could |
30 |
> >>> potentially break google-chrome the gentoo devs would add a blocker so |
31 |
> >>> you wont be able to install the 2 at the same time. |
32 |
> >>> |
33 |
> >> |
34 |
> >> Or I can just bundle a copy of the necessary libraries, similar to |
35 |
> >> what I have done for libudev.so.0. |
36 |
> >> |
37 |
> > |
38 |
> > Sounds good. I guess I'll switch to binary chrome then. |
39 |
> |
40 |
> Also, I suppose that, if there were library incompatibilities, the |
41 |
> package would never go stable, or would at least, like Yohan said, lead |
42 |
> to a block/version dependency. |
43 |
> |
44 |
> -- |
45 |
> Nuno Silva (aka njsg) |
46 |
> http://njsg.sdf-eu.org/ |
47 |
> |
48 |
> |
49 |
> |