[SDL] SDL 1.3 status ?

Jonathan Dearborn grimfang4 at gmail.com
Sun Jul 24 12:15:24 PDT 2011

I still favor bumping it up to SDL 2 before making the naming decisions,
since it is such a big, purposefully incompatible upgrade.

Jonny D

On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Torsten Giebl <wizard at syntheticsw.com>wrote:

> Hello !
>  On this topic, I'd like to note that replacing SDL 1.2 with SDL 1.3
>> system-wide is a nightmare on Linux distros, I think that SDL 1.3 either
>> needs to be ABI-compatible (thus distros would consider it a straightforward
>> package upgrade) or have sdl12-config and sdl13-config scripts and so on,
>> and of course differently named static and dynamic libraries by version.
>> I realize this might be taken out of context - I'm not saying that major
>> changes should occur to SDL 1.3 or not, I'm saying that the packaging
>> situation should be sorted out before SDL 1.3 gets out of beta :)
>> As it stands I'd like to use SDL 1.3 on all platforms but it's a thorny
>> problem on Linux with distros not packaging SDL 1.3, and static linking
>> being something that is generally frowned upon on linux (for security patch
>> reasons).
> I agree the user should be able to install SDL 1.3 in friendly coexistence
> to SDL 1.2.
> The same is needed for the SDL Helper libs like SDL_image, SDL_mixer ...
> I would like to see that in the future a system has a sdl-config for old
> SDL 1.2 sdl13-config for SDL 1.3.
> Two versions SDL_mixer with different names on the same system, one for SDL
> 1.2 and one for SDL 1.3.
> CU
> ______________________________**_________________
> SDL mailing list
> SDL at lists.libsdl.org
> http://lists.libsdl.org/**listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org<http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20110724/6935fe90/attachment-0008.htm>

More information about the SDL mailing list