From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Sep  4 00:36:26 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 276177AB
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu,  4 Sep 2014 00:36:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.in-addr.com (mail.in-addr.com
 [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:61e8::2525:2525])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD8F71EF5
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu,  4 Sep 2014 00:36:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from gjp by mail.in-addr.com with local (Exim 4.84 (FreeBSD))
 (envelope-from <gpalmer@freebsd.org>)
 id 1XPL2F-00078R-Hk; Thu, 04 Sep 2014 01:36:23 +0100
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 01:36:23 +0100
From: Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org>
To: Brandon Allbery <allbery.b@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: pkg question - Difference pkg vs port
Message-ID: <20140904003623.GA10423@in-addr.com>
References: <op.xlmsddjrg7njmm@michael-think>
 <CAKFCL4UX1Z-UsJYix8RR1eSkU38j04UE3WOt7d-Wz4yZX9J9OQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <op.xlmwnmovg7njmm@michael-think>
 <CAKFCL4Xx9MUdiTTzNcAmiGpKPnNVUfmp+K+uMpjaZzJ1cZQZyQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKFCL4Xx9MUdiTTzNcAmiGpKPnNVUfmp+K+uMpjaZzJ1cZQZyQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gpalmer@freebsd.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.in-addr.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: Michael Ross <gmx@ross.cx>,
 FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 00:36:26 -0000

On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 07:32:48PM -0400, Brandon Allbery wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Michael Ross <gmx@ross.cx> wrote:
> 
> > "Anything that provides" I think is the key to where I started thinking
> > wrong:
> >
> > The dependency is not "Shared libs required" libmysqlclient.so.18,
> > but one specific port that provides libmysqlclient.so.18 - mysql55-client.
> >
> 
> Ports can do "provides library" dependencies. Packages can only depend on
> packages. You can try to force it but you could also confuse your package
> database rather badly.

Why can't packages check to see if the library exists and use it if it
does?  RPM does something like that, although I think they go much
further with that process.

In this case, AFAIK the mysql client library API is stable - the 5.5 and
5.6 library versions should have the same API so the requirement to
install the 5.5 package is a bit silly.

(I'm dreading this e-mail taking us down the RPM path of dozens of
 different packages that make up one program, foo-devel, foo-libs,
 foo-client, etc)

Gary