Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 13:43:36 +0100 (CET) From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: tadayuki.okada@windriver.com Cc: tadayuki@mediaone.net, mi@aldan.algebra.com, will@csociety.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/graphics/gd Makefile pkg-comment Message-ID: <200201231243.g0NChca03239@Magelan.Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <3C4D7682.9C9D7A5C@windriver.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 22 Jan, Tadayuki OKADA wrote:
>> > I meant:
>> > If port A depends on port B's library.
>> > port B updated. Assume it breaks binary compatibility.
>> > port A build will not be broken, so forget PORTREVISION bump.
>> > People update port B, but not port A. so port A will stop working.
>>
>> The already installed port A will also stop to work if the Makefile for
>> port A specifies the needed version in LIB_DEPENDS. That's what Mikhail
>> tried to say.
> I meant installed port. With his method, people can't tell if installed
> port A should be updated or not.
Personally I don't see a great difference between 'less
/usr/ports/.../portA/Makefile' and 'ldd /path/to/binary/of/portA'.
Mikhail's proposal doesn't change the _run_ time behavior compared to
the actual approach. His proposal changes the _build_ time behavior.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed...
...Oh, wait a minute, he already does.
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net
GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200201231243.g0NChca03239>