Hi everyone, I'm the author of a/the libhal(-storage) C++ wrapper ( <a href="http://projects.beep-media-player.org/index.php/Main/Hal">http://projects.beep-media-player.org/index.php/Main/Hal</a> ). I've noticed some subtle differences between hal 0.5.7.x and hal 0.5.8.x which are not clear to me as to why this happened: 0.5.7: --snip-- struct LibHalPropertySetIterator_s {   LibHalPropertySet *set;    /**< Property set we are iterating over */   unsigned int index; --snip-- 0.5.8: --snip-- struct LibHalPropertySetIterator_s {   LibHalPropertySet *set;    /**< Property set we are iterating over */   unsigned int idx; --snip-- ("index" was renamed to "idx") I'm providing an STL-like (input iterator concept providing) interface for iterating through the PS of a device in the C++ wrapper, which requires this code here to check whether 2 iters are identical (point to the same position in the PS, and belong to the same PS): --snip-- #ifdef HAVE_HAL_058                 return ((i.idx == other.i.idx) && (i.set == other.i.set)); #else                 return ((i.index == other.i.index) && (i.set == other.i.set )); #endif // HAVE_HAL_058 --snip-- I'd like to ask to please not change the name of this member or the entire PS iterator struct itself, if possible at all. Alternatively mark the entire structure as private/opaque/subject to change, and if that should happen, please provide get_current_index(), and get_property_set() methods for the iterator. The second thing i'd like to point out is this: 0.5.7 LibHalDriveCdromCaps: --snip--   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSR   = 0x0080,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSRW  = 0x0100,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSRDL = 0x0200,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_BDROM      = 0x0400,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_BDR        = 0x0800, --snip-- 0.5.8 LibHalDriveCdromCaps: --snip--   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSR    = 0x00080,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSRW   = 0x00100,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSRDL  = 0x00200,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSRWDL = 0x00400,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_BDROM       = 0x00800,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_BDR         = 0x01000, --snip-- All the values after  DVDPLUSRDL are shifted, which doesn't make much sense to me, as there is enough padding. How this padding was to be used exactly I don't know, but without knowing it, this here would seem to have been just as sensible and then even keeping the API wrt this enum stable:   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSR    = 0x00080,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSRW   = 0x00100,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSRDL  = 0x00200,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_DVDPLUSRWDL = 0x00201,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_BDROM       = 0x00400,   LIBHAL_DRIVE_CDROM_CAPS_BDR         = 0x00800, Thanks for consideration Milosz