From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Jul 25 05:50:11 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA16367 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Sat, 25 Jul 1998 05:50:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from news1.gtn.com (news1.gtn.com [194.77.0.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA16259; Sat, 25 Jul 1998 05:49:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from andreas@klemm.gtn.com) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by news1.gtn.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with UUCP id OAA20447; Sat, 25 Jul 1998 14:45:07 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from andreas@localhost) by klemm.gtn.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA14899; Sat, 25 Jul 1998 14:31:37 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from andreas) Message-ID: <19980725143136.A14108@klemm.gtn.com> Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 14:31:36 +0200 From: Andreas Klemm To: Satoshi Asami , andreas@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, scrappy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: qt and mico-latest References: <199807251147.EAA25109@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.1i In-Reply-To: <199807251147.EAA25109@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>; from Satoshi Asami on Sat, Jul 25, 1998 at 04:47:37AM -0700 X-Disclaimer: A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT SMP Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Jul 25, 1998 at 04:47:37AM -0700, Satoshi Asami wrote: > The qt131/qt133/qt140 split is not really functional because of shared > library versioning. With both libqt.so.1.33 and libqt.so.1.40 > installed, ldconfig will not pick up libqt.so.1.33, and ld will always > use libqt.so.1.40. This causes (for instance) the mico-latest port to > @pkgdep on qt-1.33 while linking against qt-1.40. This is bad. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Yes. > There are several courses of actions: > > (1) The tcl/tk route. Rename libqt.so.1.40 to libqt140.so.1.0 or > something. The only feasible solution if we have at least one > port depend on each of the qt versions. Hmm... > (2) Only use one of the qt's as dependencies and mark all the others > with MANUAL_PACKAGE_BUILD. Hmm... > (3) Delete all but one of the qt's. Would be easiest solution. How about backward compatibility ? > I guess (3) is out of question as there should be a reason why you > asked me to split the ports in the first place. You wanted me to do so because of the TCL/TK version mess ! And I agreed. But possibly we have more luck with qt in terms of backward compatibility. > Looing at > ports/INDEX, (2) doesn't seem to work either, unless all those ports > that depend on 1.40 actually can work with 1.33 (or something like > that). We should ask in ports if nobody objects nuking the other qt libs. -- Andreas Klemm http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~andreas What gives you 90% more speed, for example, in kernel compilation ? http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~fsmp/SMP/akgraph-a/graph1.html "NT = Not Today" (Maggie Biggs) ``powered by FreeBSD SMP'' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message