After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 318599 - Missing symbols in libgnomeprint 2.12
Missing symbols in libgnomeprint 2.12
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: gnome-print
Classification: Deprecated
Component: general
2.11.x
Other Linux
: Normal major
: ---
Assigned To: Jody Goldberg
Jody Goldberg
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-10-11 19:11 UTC by Josselin Mouette
Modified: 2007-01-25 09:38 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.11/2.12



Description Josselin Mouette 2005-10-11 19:11:43 UTC
Version details: 2.12.1

The following symbols from libgnomeprint 2.10 are missing in the 2.12 version:

gnome_print_frgba_get_type
gnome_print_frgba_new
gnome_print_multipage_finish_page
gnome_print_multipage_get_type
gnome_print_multipage_new
gnome_print_rbuf_new
gp_gc_get_data
gp_gc_set_data

Looking at the changelog they were replaced by filters, but they were
nevertheless part of the public ABI. This is the case where the SONAME should be
changed (to something like libgnomeprint-2.2.so.1).
Comment 1 Jody Goldberg 2005-10-11 21:17:34 UTC
These
   gp_gc_get_data
   gp_gc_set_data

Are internal symbols and the others are debatable, but I agree the so name
should have changed.
Comment 2 Josselin Mouette 2005-10-11 21:20:31 UTC
Currently, I haven't found software other than libgnomeprintui that uses these
symbols, which means we can jump through this hoop with a package conflict. Do
you know of some other applications using it?
Comment 3 Jody Goldberg 2005-10-11 21:29:01 UTC
Using those symbols would be a bug.  They are explicitly marked as private.  If
I had more time I would have removed them entirely and used an opaque
g_object_data_set approach.
Comment 4 Josselin Mouette 2005-10-11 21:34:01 UTC
Private, but not private for libgnomeprintui ? ;)

Anyway, in this case, the package conflict will be enough, thanks.
Comment 5 Jody Goldberg 2005-10-11 21:39:19 UTC
writen explicitly for libgnomeprintui.   It was cheesy but the two libraries are
really basicly one library with the gtk depend moved out of half of it.  Looking
back that decision is somewhat questionable.
Comment 6 Kjartan Maraas 2007-01-25 09:38:46 UTC
Ok, too late to do anything about this now. Closing.