Keeping binary compatibility

Ingo Klöcker kloecker at
Fri Oct 1 20:19:48 CEST 2010

On Friday 01 October 2010, Lubos Lunak wrote:
>  Hello,
>  as you probably know, the theory is that KDE libraries keep
> backwards binary compatibility. As you might or might not know, that
> is the theory.
>  I've found a tool called abi-compliance-checker
> (
> and it has a page with checks for various libraries including ours
> (,
> which is not as green as it should be.
>  I've also compared openSUSE packages for 4.4.4 and 4.5.1 and there
> are problems too ( for what I
> checked). Let me point out just one,
> , which I think shows that this
> occassionally happening is inevitable.
>  Moreover, there seem to be cases where we simply don't seem to have
> rules (or at least I couldn't find them).

Where did you look for the rules? Did you read [1]?

> Do we have rules that say
> more than "kdelibs is BC stable, we don't care about the rest"?

Yes, kind of. See [1]

> What's the status with e.g. kdeedu libs?

No BC. See [1]

> I'm asking because,
> consider e.g. these errors from an attempt to uninstall
> kdebase/workspace package here:
>  Looking at how KDE provides various libraries leads to a number of
> WTH questions, like:
> - WTH is the ABI stability documented, besides kdelibs?

See [1]


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : 

More information about the release-team mailing list