Generate mashals during build in libxfcegui4

[Brian J. Tarricone]

Nick Schermer wrote:
> 2007/12/13, Brian J. Tarricone <bjt23 at cornell.edu>:
>> Technically, yes (why the hell are the header files even installed?!),
>> but I think the 'p_' prefix is clear enough that they were private...
> 
> That still doesn't answer my question ^_^, should I change the verinfo
> and/or package version and if so, what will it be?
> 
> Right know it's: 6:4:2. So do we see it as a removed interface since
> the last update: 7:0:2 (recompile depending apps)? or only a code
> change: 6:5:2 (no need to recompile other components)? Or removed
> interface after release: 6:4:0 (recompile depending apps)?
> Or leave it and wait until we remove (more) stuff from it (hopefully
> netk after we made the switch)?

Regardless of whether or not we want to bump the lib interface version, 
the libtool docs recommend only doing so before making a release to 
avoid unnecessary inflation of the value, and frequent changes (I'm 
surprised we're all the way up to 6 after only 4 years).

But anyway, *technically*, yes, this change requires an interface 
version bump, but since the functions that were 'removed' were all 
prefixed with 'p_', one could argue that those functions were private 
and never part of the ABI in the first place, and so no, we might not 
bump the version.

Personally, I'm against any change that breaks ABI for 4.6 anyway. 
There's really just no compelling reason to do it.  And no, I don't 
think "remove crap we don't use" is compelling enough.  If most of 
libxfce4gui isn't being used, we should ditch it entirely and move the 
useful stuff to a new library.  That way the old library can live on for 
whatever needs it, and apps can move to the new lib and drop their dep 
on the old.  In the future, we'll version the library soname like 
libexo, etc. do so this sort of thing won't be such a big deal.

	-brian