Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 17:03:37 -0500 From: John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org>, marino@freebsd.org, Vsevolod Stakhov <vsevolod@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r422826 - head/security/libsodium Message-ID: <005d1679-6e3c-c09b-0bc5-0fd123330ae4@marino.st> In-Reply-To: <2acdea56-9c02-4ea9-943c-7a5091ca49ab@FreeBSD.org> References: <201609271943.u8RJhXe0061946@repo.freebsd.org> <6d763b2f-0745-9f7a-c94e-b9653174bdd5@marino.st> <f67dca1b-3249-fca0-2113-ac440dd4346e@FreeBSD.org> <b23328e4-1adb-177d-5e88-e43588c56a1b@marino.st> <2acdea56-9c02-4ea9-943c-7a5091ca49ab@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9/27/2016 16:58, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > Le 27/09/2016 à 23:50, John Marino a écrit : >> On 9/27/2016 16:14, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >>> Le 27/09/2016 à 21:51, John Marino a écrit : >>>> On 9/27/2016 14:43, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote: >>>>> Author: vsevolod Date: Tue Sep 27 19:43:32 2016 New Revision: >>>>> 422826 URL: >>>>> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/422826 >>>>> >>>>> Log: - Update to 1.0.11 >>>>> >>>>> No bump for dependent port is required as this version has no >>>>> API changes >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Modified: head/security/libsodium/pkg-plist >>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --- head/security/libsodium/pkg-plist Tue Sep 27 18:25:34 2016 >>>>> (r422825) +++ head/security/libsodium/pkg-plist Tue Sep 27 >>>>> 19:43:32 2016 (r422826) @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ >>>>> include/sodium/version.h lib/libsodium.a lib/libsodium.so >>>>> lib/libsodium.so.18 -lib/libsodium.so.18.1.0 >>>>> +lib/libsodium.so.18.1.1 libdata/pkgconfig/libsodium.pc >>>>> %%PORTDOCS%%%%DOCSDIR%%/AUTHORS >>>>> %%PORTDOCS%%%%DOCSDIR%%/README.markdown >>>>> >>>> >>>> First, I don't think the "no API change" means a bump is not >>>> mandatory. Secondly, the SO name of the library changed!!! You >>>> have to bump it, there's no question here. >>>> >>>> It's 1000x better to bump unnecessarily than to skip a bump >>>> that is required. >>> >>> No it did not. >>> >>> $ readelf -d `make -V STAGEDIR`/usr/local/lib/libsodium.so|grep >>> soname 0x000000000000000e SONAME Library soname: >>> [libsodium.so.18] >>> >>> The file name changed, but software will try to find >>> libsodium.so.18, and that will still work. >>> >> >> regardless, why should the bump be avoided? There could have been >> fixes against the existing functions. >> >> I'm starting to see a lot of people go out of their way to bump and >> I don't know where the trend is coming from. >> >> Is portmgr saying vsevolod is correct not to bump this? I would >> bump it and if that's wrong maybe my bump criteria is wrong. > > You have to bump ports that depend on a .so when the soname changes. > For example, if the libsodium update had done this: > > lib/libsodium.so -lib/libsodium.so.18 -lib/libsodium.so.18.1.0 > +lib/libsodium.so.19 +lib/libsodium.so.19.2.1 > > You would have needed to bump, because the soname would have changed > from libsodium.so.18 to libsodium.so.19, and software built with the > old version would have tried to load the .18 lib that did not exist > any more. > > As a general rule, when you don't know what to do, don't do what you > guessed, ask. There are people with more knowledge than you, and > they can explain you what you are doing wrong. I wasn't talking about missing linkage. I dropped that after you said the registered SONAME didn't change. The point I was making is that there could have been bug fixes to existing functions. Those fixes will only accidentally propagate now. It's doubtful that many people know with 100% certainty that there are no fixes that should be propagated. I certainly wouldn't tie the evaluation to the SONAME. I can say I am surprised that you think I'm wrong to assert this needs a bump. In my case, the worst that can happen are the ports dependent get rebuilt. In the other case, the worst that can happen is that bug fixes don't propagate. I don't think my position is wrong. John --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?005d1679-6e3c-c09b-0bc5-0fd123330ae4>