Re: [Monotone-devel] compatibility woes

[Christof Petig]

graydon hoare schrieb:
>      further. I will stop doing fully-static builds shortly, and move
>      to mixed builds (keeping lib3rdparty.a, but dynamically linking
>      to libc). I haven't decided how to handle the non-header parts of
>      boost yet, but perhaps they can be folded into our sources.

Personally I prefer to use a shared library (boost in this case) once it 
is provided by the distribution (executable size on powerpc: shared 4MB, 
static 5MB (both stripped)). Though I see that once you ship binaries 
this is not a reasonable option for you.

It would be kind to design the configure system in a way which makes 
shared linking easily possible for the ones which care (--enable-shared ?)

>      I have done this on my own tree and my own depot; if you are
>      tracking monotone, the easiest thing to do is just delete your
>      database and re-fetch from my depot.

>      I'm very sorry, this should not have happened; hopefully we're
>      still young and small enough that nobody got seriously burned.

I was not as shocked of an incompatible change as I was shocked of the 
advice to delete the database.

What are the downsides of an monotone fetch? Why isn't it enough in this 
case? This bothers me more.

> if you have built your own
>      depots

I got stuck at the 'space is not allowed in filenames' point during an 
CVS import. Count this mail as another vote for supporting it ;-)

    Christof