Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 22:44:32 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/gnutls Makefile distinfo pkg-plist Message-ID: <20040607054432.GA2746@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040605023736.GA93280@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200406042152.i54LqrAg090931@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040605023736.GA93280@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 07:37:36PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 02:52:53PM -0700, Sergei Kolobov wrote: > > sergei 2004/06/04 14:52:53 PDT > > > > FreeBSD ports repository > > > > Modified files: > > security/gnutls Makefile distinfo pkg-plist > > Log: > > - Update to 1.0.13 (latest stable version) [1] > > - Switch to libtool-1.5 > > - NOTE: shlib version was downgraded from 13 to 12 > > Isn't that going to cause problems for anyone who uses portupgrade, > which preserves the old library version? i.e. new code will be linked > to the old (higher-versioned) library. The "downgrade" isn't a problem functionality as the toolchian will be linked to what ever the .so symlink points to. Remember that for ELF, the shared lib "version number" is really just plain text (vs. a.out rules). It will confuse the hell out of people, but not the toolchain or OS. Does 'portupgrade' really hard code the numerical ordering rule vs. looking at what the .so symlink pointed to? > Kris . o O (What on earth were they thinking?) Agreed. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040607054432.GA2746>