Binary compatibility broken? between 3.3.1 and 3.3.2

[Leo Savernik]

Am Donnerstag, 2. Dezember 2004 10:02 schrieb Stephan Kulow:
> > Yet we can argue whether it is allowed to introduce new public symbols in
> > patchlevel releases.
>
> We could, yes. But it would end up with: packages are supposed to require
> the patchlevel version they built against as minimum.

Isn't it already this way?

mfg
 Leo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20041202/8c1676c2/attachment.sig>