On Thursday 21 September 2006 10:38, Alin Nastac wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > There is one flaw with this though; packages can provide both
> > libraries _and_ binaries. Our dependencies don't represent whether
> > the dep is actual linkage, or just commandline consuming, so (using
> > the openssl example) any package that invokes openssl via the
> > commandline to do a few simple chksum ops gets rebuilt, despite the
> > fact it wasn't affected by linkage change ups.
>
> I like BINCOMPAT proposal but it solves only half of the problem. You
> assume that all dependent packages cares about binary compatibility.
> Why not using a BDEPEND var in those dependent packages affected by the
> BINCOMPAT values of their dependencies?
>
> For instance, I would set the following:
> - in net-dialup/ppp ebuild: BINCOMPAT=${PV}
> - in net-dialup/pptpd ebuild: BDEPEND="net-dialup/ppp"i think you're merging the two issues you brought up ... there is binary ABI issues (which should not require a new DEPEND variable as portage can extract that information out at runtime) and there is runtime plugin issues with packages using dlopen() (which portage cannot extract as the dependency cannot ever be extracted) or did i not read your original e-mail incorrectly ? -mike
pgpzT9ZX7vRoe.pgp
Description: PGP signature
