Hans de Graaff wrote: > > I think ABI fits well though? The situation is that A DEPENDs on B, > > and at some point B changes in a way that A must be rebuilt in order > > to run - right? > > At least for dev-ruby/nokogiri this is not the case. It checks the > version of libxml2 it was built against versus the one it finds at > runtime and starts to issue warnings if they don't match, but it will > still run.
Why does nokogiri issue warnings about something that isn't actually a problem? > So it would be a good idea to automatically update nokogiri after > libxml2 to avoid cluttering logfiles and cron emails. But the ABI > didn't change. Or fix this behavior upstream, if there is no actual reason to require the built-against version. > dev-ruby/rmagick does something similar for imagemagick but > actually refuses to run, even if the ABI would stay the same. ruby y u so weird? //Peter
pgpGpQNzTkz7w.pgp
Description: PGP signature
