From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 22 22:54:21 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DE2E1065675 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 22:54:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: from email1.allantgroup.com (email1.emsphone.com [199.67.51.115]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C481B8FC1E for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 22:54:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by email1.allantgroup.com (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id o3MMsIDQ032518 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:54:18 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: from dan.emsphone.com (smmsp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dan.emsphone.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o3MMsI12025579 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:54:18 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.14.4/8.14.3/Submit) id o3MMsHXG025577; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:54:17 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dan) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:54:17 -0500 From: Dan Nelson To: Steve Franks Message-ID: <20100422225417.GA14572@dan.emsphone.com> References: <20100414174853.GC43908@dan.emsphone.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-OS: FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96 at email1.allantgroup.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (email1.allantgroup.com [199.67.51.78]); Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:54:18 -0500 (CDT) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.45 Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Leinier Cruz Salfran Subject: Re: there is a way to avoid strict libraries linking? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 22:54:21 -0000 In the last episode (Apr 22), Steve Franks said: > > It's much safer to just leave the libraries alone.  Just because you > > upgraded libpng doesn't mean that your old gtk binary will stop working > > (assuming you are using "portupgrade" or "portmaster -w" which preserves > > Untrue. Portupgrade deletes the old > version of the port by default. The PNG upgrade was a major PITA, because > I installed one new port that thought it had to have it. I'm sure 98% of > the ports I then had to upgrade would have still worked just fine even if > rebuilt against the old libpng. Are you sure you're talking about portupgrade? From the manpage: -u --uninstall-shlibs Do not preserve old shared libraries. By default, portupgrade preserves shared libraries on uninstallation for safety. See the pkg_deinstall(1) manpage and check out the -P option for details. I've 400 MB of shared libs in /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg as proof that it does this by default, too. I should probably clean that out someday :) > I think the complaint here is that the port dependencies system > frequently gives the impression/enforces the rule that new ports will > depend on whatever the most current version of everything is in the > ports tree at the time they were built, forcing sort of a perpetual > upgrade cycle. IMHO this is probably due to naive port maintainers > (such as myself) incorrectly pointing a port at libpng.5 instead of > any libpng, or libpng >= 5. Once the ports tree is 'poisoned' in this > fashion, there's really no going back. I'd sure vote for an audit of > this behavior as a summer of code project. I don't think the porter's handbook mentions the DEPENDS_* comparison operators at all, so unless you read (and understood) the ${deptype:L}-depends target in bsd.port.mk, you might not know it existed. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com