On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 05:53:51PM +0100, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 09:18:09AM +0500, ?????????? ?????????????? wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 09:46:27AM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > On 2015/11/03 10:38, ?????????? ?????????????? wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 02:19:51AM +0100, Juan Francisco Cantero 
> > > > Hurtado wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 11:41:21PM +0500, ?????????? ?????????????? 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Here is output on my system, OpenBSD 5.8, from out-of-date script:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > databases/postgresql,-server   # @libxml-2.9.2p1 -> @libxml-2.9.2p2
> > > > > > devel/quirks                   # always-update -> quirks-2.114
> > > > > > editors/libreoffice,-main      # @libxslt-1.1.28p2 -> 
> > > > > > @libxslt-1.1.28p3
> > > > > > misc/shared-mime-info          # @libxml-2.9.2p1 -> @libxml-2.9.2p2
> > > > > > multimedia/libbluray           # @libxml-2.9.2p1 -> @libxml-2.9.2p2
> > > > > > print/cups,-libs               # @gnutls-3.3.16 -> @gnutls-3.3.16p0
> > > > > > textproc/raptor                # @libxslt-1.1.28p2 -> 
> > > > > > @libxslt-1.1.28p3
> > > > > > x11/gnome/librsvg              # 
> > > > > > @gdk-pixbuf-2.30.8p1,@libxml-2.9.2p1 -> 
> > > > > > @gdk-pixbuf-2.30.8p3,@libxml-2.9.2p2
> > > > > > x11/gtk+2,-main                # @gdk-pixbuf-2.30.8p1 -> 
> > > > > > @gdk-pixbuf-2.30.8p3
> > > > > > x11/gtk+3,-guic                # @gdk-pixbuf-2.30.8p1 -> 
> > > > > > @gdk-pixbuf-2.30.8p3
> > > > > > x11/kde/libs3,-main            # @libxslt-1.1.28p2 -> 
> > > > > > @libxslt-1.1.28p3
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Am I right, that left column is ports/packages that can be updated; 
> > > > > > right
> > > > > > column is reason why they need to be updated?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yes.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Also is it true that in my case I can ignore all this updates 
> > > > > > because
> > > > > > all ports from left column are dynamicaly linked with already 
> > > > > > updated
> > > > > > library from right column?
> > > > > 
> > > > > No. Those ports use the outdated version of the library.
> > > > 
> > > > Can You elaborate, please, I don't understand. E.g. shared-mime-info.
> > > > 
> > > > $ ldd /usr/local/bin/update-mime-database | grep libxml
> > > >         00001d0114c00000 00001d011515f000 rlib 0    1   0      
> > > > /usr/local/lib/libxml2.so.15.1
> > > > 
> > > > $ pkg_info | grep libxml                                                
> > > >                                                                         
> > > >                
> > > > libxml-2.9.2p2      XML parsing library
> > > > 
> > > > So libxml already updated. If I understand correctly: if libxml updated 
> > > > and update-mime-database
> > > > _dynamicaly_ linked to it there is no need further intervention, is not 
> > > > is so?
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Look in e.g. /var/db/pkg/shared-mime-info-1.5/+CONTENTS and you'll
> > > see that it records the dependency like this
> > > 
> > > @depend textproc/libxml,-main:libxml-*:libxml-2.9.2p2
> > > ...
> > > @wantlib xml2.15.1
> > > 
> > > out-of-date reports on any packages where the @depend line is out
> > > of date compared to the ports tree, even though the shared library
> > > itself (noted in the @wantlib line) hasn't changed incompatibly.
> > 
> > I'm sorry for reiterate it over again and thanks for detailed
> > clarification. But if I understand it correctly I'am right with my
> > example above with update-mime-database? I already have newest
> > version libxml installed so de-facto there is no need updating
> > update-mime-database in such case?
> 
> You doesn't have the newest version. There is always a good reason to
> change the REVISION of a port (look at the pX suffix). In this case,
> the version 2.9.2p2 includes two security fixes.

He also has the new version installed. He just have a few packages
installed, which were build against the old version. If they use the
dynamic library, there's just the new one.

> In short, always update your packages. No exception.
 
It's my prefered way too. No need to see if something still may use an
older library.

Regards,
Markus

Reply via email to