Upgrading libpng: shall we move to 1.4.x or 1.5.x?

[Adam Jackson]

On Fri, 2011-11-04 at 13:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

> I did test rebuilds in mock of all rawhide packages that are reported to
> be dependent on libpng.  Out of 964 packages with dependencies on libpng,
> we have:
> 
> Packages that rebuilt successfully with 1.5	658
> Packages that FTBFS for non-libpng reasons	186
> Packages that rebuilt with 1.4, but not 1.5	74
> Packages that need help even with 1.4		46

I've been doing driveby rebuilds for some of these that happen to have
been in a default install on my machine, but we still have a huge pile
of things built against the old libpng in rawhide:

[ajax at f17 cairomm]$ repoquery --whatrequires libpng-compat | wc -l
786

Does anyone object to me just kicking a mass rebuild for this?  I'll
happily follow up with the list of build failures.

- ajax
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20111205/8a0ff4ce/attachment.bin