Keeping binary compatibility

Alexander Neundorf neundorf at
Sun Oct 3 21:32:32 CEST 2010

On Friday 01 October 2010, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 01.10.10 15:32:41, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> > - WTH does e.g. ksysguard install libraries .so and .h files for
> > something that looks a lot like its internal libraries?
> In case this is about libprocess/libprocessui they are not internal.
> They're useful for apps that want to present a widget with a list of
> processes in a nice way. KDevelop uses that to select a process to
> attach gdb to it. They were supposed to move to kdelibs at some point,
> but that didn't happen yet unfortunately.
> Having said that, I generally agree that there's too little information
> and awareness (among developers) about BC. In particular there's no
> place that clearly says for each module which libs should keep BC and
> which don't. Its apparently also pretty unknown to developers that when
> BC is broken the soname needs to be changed. So part of the problem is
> more of informational than a technical one (maybe even social) to make
> developers aware of their responsibility when installing shared libs.

What about source compatibility ?

At least for kdelibs we try to guarantee source compatiblity of the cmake 


More information about the release-team mailing list