At 17:41 Uhr -0500 02.02.2002, David R. Morrison wrote: >Max Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I have to correct myself: the actual cause is that we use a different >> install_name at link time, i.e. we give libz.1.dylib as install_name, >> and Apple obviously libz.1.1.3.dylib. > >Very good. So the strategy I am proposing in my shared libraries messages >should work fine. > >I'm going to take the existing libpng and split it into libpng and >libpng-dev as a test case of all of this. (This will then give an upgrade >path to my new libpng3 package which has had a change in its major version >number.)
See my other mail why I see this as problematic - in summary, all packages that depend on libpng would have to be changed in order to build correctly (namely they would require a BuildDepends: libpng-dev) this way. > >My idea about how to change over to a new system is this: > >1) Any dynamic library already in fink can stay there until somebody wants > to upgrade something. Exactly. > >2) New dynamic libraries should use the system of two packages fooN and > fooN-dev, where N is the major version number. But it would be nice if this was automated, to save build time, to gurantee both are in sync, and to ease the live of maintainers. And to reduce the number of bugs :) >3) Upgrades of old packages should at some point be split into foo and > foo-dev. Then when the major version number increases to M at some > point in the future, the replacement packages can be called fooM and > fooM-dev. > >Otherwise, we get into big upgrade messes if we try to rename existing >packages. Or we go with foo and foo-shlib, and fooM and fooM-shlib Max -- ----------------------------------------------- Max Horn Software Developer email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> phone: (+49) 6151-494890 _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
