From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 17 14:59:54 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCB5D106566C for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:59:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com) Received: from vms173001pub.verizon.net (vms173001pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B60F38FC15 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:59:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.8] ([unknown] [96.242.210.31]) by vms173001.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0LZJ00J4XIV5O3YU@vms173001.mailsrvcs.net> for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 07:59:35 -0600 (CST) Message-id: <4F3E5D41.9050503@aldan.algebra.com> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 08:59:29 -0500 From: "Mikhail T." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110926 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-version: 1.0 To: Jakub Lach References: <4F3E289D.9050605@FreeBSD.org> <4F3E2CED.90601@FreeBSD.org> <4F3E3537.9040105@FreeBSD.org> <1329478316415-5492205.post@n5.nabble.com> In-reply-to: <1329478316415-5492205.post@n5.nabble.com> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 16:21:24 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Re: recent portrevision bump for libvpx X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:59:54 -0000 On -10.01.-28163 14:59, Jakub Lach wrote: > Speaking of recent libvpx update, some ports explicitly look > for libvpx.so.0, and fail to update trying to install again libvpx > which is already installed. > > e.g. multimedia/gstreamer-plugins-vp8 Yet again I'd like to point out, that -- contrary to the wide-spread practice -- ports should not, by default, list a particular shlib major number in LIB_DEPENDS. Only in cases, when a wrong version of some libfoo is known to cause problems, should the correct version be explicitly given in LIB_DEPENDS. -mi