Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 17:44:57 +0100 From: Vsevolod Stakhov <vsevolod@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de>, Tijl Coosemans <tijl@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r364287 - head/ports-mgmt/pkg-devel Message-ID: <53E3AD09.2050000@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <53E3AC0C.5020904@gmx.de> References: <53e39939.55bc.4ca5432c@svn.freebsd.org> <20140807172841.58633e63@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <53E3A468.5050603@FreeBSD.org> <53E3AC0C.5020904@gmx.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07/08/14 17:40, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 07.08.2014 um 18:08 schrieb Vsevolod Stakhov: > >> Due to mainly [2] there are a lot of broken deps, for example, libxml2 >> provides libxml2.so.2.12, whilst all dependant ports requires >> libxml2.so.2. Consequently, some weird packages, such as wine-i386-devel >> are installed, since it pretends to provide libxml2.so.2 and due to [3] >> and [1] wine is treated as a provide candidate. > > The library's SONAME should be the canonical name because that gets > recorded in another library's or executable's NEEDED tag, and pkg might > be able to check at package creation, and again before install, if a > file installing a library also installs a file that matches the SONAME. That is how it works for shared lib requires. But that is not how it works for shared lib provides. And this ambiguity is the source of [3]. >> shared libraries requires. Of course, that doesn't save us from false >> positives but fixing of [1] - [4] issues is hard and it would likely >> require full rebuild and re-installation of all packages. > > Aren't we doing that weekly anyways? Do all users reinstall all their packages weekly? No, they don't I suppose. -- Vsevolod Stakhov
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?53E3AD09.2050000>