On 6/11/12 2:16 PM, Peter Dyballa wrote: > > Am 11.06.2012 um 17:52 schrieb Alexander Hansen: > >>> Files: lib/lib*.*.dylib >>> Shlibs: << >>> %p/lib/libMagick++.5.dylib 6.0.0 %n (>= 6.7.7-6) >>> %p/lib/libMagickWand.5.dylib 6.0.0 %n (>= 6.7.7-6) >>> %p/lib/libMagickCore.5.dylib 6.0.0 %n (>= 6.7.7-6) >>> << >>> DocFiles: LICENSE README.txt ChangeLog NEWS.txt >>> << >>> >>> Why can't I use %V as in (>= %V)? (Although I presume that the version >>> number does not play a role...) And similarly here: >>> >> >> You mean in the Shlibs field? You presume incorrectly. It's in the >> packaging manual. >> >> The Shlibs declaration is to specify the _first_ version-revision of a >> package where a library with a given install_name appears with a given >> compability_version. >> >> Thus, if upstream makes an updated version of the package but doesn't >> change the install_name or compatibility_version of the libraries, then >> your libraries should still be the same, and you keep the _same_ Shlibs >> fields in the new version of the package. > > So I can leave there some old version number, 6.5.7-1?
In this case, no. The install names and compatibility versions are completely different. The current imagemagick package in Fink has: Shlibs: << %p/lib/libMagick++.2.dylib 3.0.0 %n (>= 6.5.7-1) %p/lib/libMagickWand.2.dylib 3.0.0 %n (>= 6.5.7-1) %p/lib/libMagickCore.2.dylib 3.0.0 %n (>= 6.5.7-1) << Note that (1) the install_names (filenames) are _different_ from your case above, and (2) the compatibility_versions are different. As noted on the tracker item for this package, this means you can't call it imagemagick2-shlibs anymore. However, this also indicates my point, in that the current version from which I got this Shlibs field is 6.5.8.10-10. The fact that the Shlibs references version 6.5.7-1 indicates that the install_names and compatibility versions didn't change from 6.5.7-1 to 6.5.8.10-10. > >> >> The only way to create your own percent expansions is to use Type. For >> example: >> >> Type: v (6.7.7) >> >> This gives you the options: >> >> %type_raw[v] = 6.7.7 >> %type_pkg[v] = 677 > > This is not satisfying, I still would have to update one more version number > manually, one more than used for the Version field. I don't think that a less-precise "version" field is something that is widely enough required at this point for a new percent expansion to be added to fink. Particularly since a workaround is available. > > -- > Greetings > > Pete > > The human animal differs from the lesser primates in his passion for lists of > "Ten Best." > – H. Allen Smith > > -- Alexander Hansen, Ph.D. Fink User Liaison http://finkakh.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/got-job/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list [email protected] List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.macosx.fink.user Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
