On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 10:31:43AM +0100, Alexander Hall wrote: > steven mestdagh wrote: > >On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 10:09:58AM +0100, Alexander Hall wrote: > > > >>Marc Matteo wrote: > >> > >>>This makes sense, but it leads to a question for me for the port > >>>masters: In this case, atk will work with the newer lib version, so is > >>>there a way to mark the port to allow this? > >> > >>1. pkg_add -u complained about the following (updating all packages): > >> glib-2.0.600.4 > >> gmodule-2.0.600.4 > >> gobject-2.0.600.4 > >> pango-1.0.800.1 > >> pangoft2-1.0.800.1 > >> t1.5.0 > >> > >>2. I had these corresponding libs installed: > >> lib/libglib-2.0.so.800.3 > >> lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.800.3 > >> lib/libgobject-2.0.so.800.3 > >> lib/libpango-1.0.so.1001.0 > >> lib/libpangoft2-1.0.so.1001.0 > >> lib/libt1.so.6.0 > >> > >>3. library-specs(7) says: > >> The package system will embed correct dependency checks in the > >> built package, according to the normal shared library semantics: > >> any library with the same major number, and a greater or equal > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > >> minor number will do. > >> > >>Thus, as far as I can see, all of these should have been identified. > > > >no, the major number is not the same (800 vs 600). > > Ok, that makes sense. I mistakenly thought of the first available number > as the major number, and so on, as in > > glib-2.0.600.4 > ^ ^ ^^^^^ > | | +-> WFT? > | +-> minor > +-> major
No, some libraries have a release number within their library name, 2.0 in this case. major.minor is the part after .so. You were probably confused by the library spec which is an abbreviated form and leaves out the .so. Look at the library filename to be sure. Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
