xlib + xcms

[Keith Packard]

On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 18:53 +0200, Daniel Stone wrote:

> There is no other 'official X.org spec' covering Xlib.  Removing
> interfaces, or otherwise incompatibly changing them, requires an
> soversion bump.  That's something that will get flatly rejected without
> so much as a second look.  Think of the Xlib API as just like the wire
> protocol.  You can extend it and build around, but you cannot (repeat:
> not -- absolutely not) remove any part of it, or do anything that would
> break old clients.

Heh. CMS may in fact be a special exception to the general rule. A
serious bug crept into this code several years ago which would lead to a
segfault in any application using any Xcms function.

Does it break the ABI if old programs which would segfault now simply
fail to start?

-- 
keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20060322/f6f6b75d/attachment.pgp>