<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - pa_format_info_free2 has disappeared" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64360#c4">Comment # 4</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - pa_format_info_free2 has disappeared" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64360">bug 64360</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:tanuk@iki.fi" title="Tanu Kaskinen <tanuk@iki.fi>"> Tanu Kaskinen</a> <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=64360#c3">comment #3</a>) > (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=64360#c1">comment #1</a>) > > Even if pa_format_info_free2() was never part of public API as exposed in > > headers? > > Yes. > > That's the rules of libtool. I don't think so. pa_format_info_free2() was never part of the ABI, except in a very technical sense that isn't relevant here, in my opinion. > And Debian/Ubuntu nowadays automatically checks > this and complains loudly (i e build failure) if a symbol is removed. Is there no way to skip the check? > We need to put it back. > > Btw, I did the same thing for FluidSynth once (removed a symbol not exposed > in the headers), and got loud complaints from more than one distro > maintainer. I ended up putting it back. Why do the distro maintainers demand adding cruft back? I understand if they complain and call us stupid and whatever, because we cause extra work for them, but there's absolutely no long term need to add pa_format_info_free2() back. It's only the distro tools that will cause trouble, no application code will ever break because of this.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>