Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>>> But using port: dependencies seem like a step back, >>>> since it's losing dependency information (i.e. "5") ? >>> >>> I'm not aware of this additional information ever having been helpful. >>> >>> lib:- and bin:-style dependencies would allow a file (in this case >>> libfetch.5.dylib) located outside the MacPorts prefix to satisfy the >>> dependency. We don't want that, so you should almost always use port:- or >>> path:-style dependencies. >> >> Well, if you have a package depending on libfetch.5.dylib >> and the package providing libfetch.5.dylib is upgraded to >> libfetch.6.dylib the system is able to notice this and >> complain about the missing dependency without a revupgrade. > > I'm not aware of MacPorts having any code that does that.
No, but that doesn't stop the additional information from being useful does it ? Anyway, rpm has such information. >> If you don't have such version information in the dependencies, >> you're at the mercy of detecting such linking errors at runtime >> and upgrading the providing port. > > If a port is upgraded and it introduces a new library version, it is the > responsibility of that committer to revbump all ports that use the library so > they get rebuilt. Yeah, and this can take ages - as seen with the libpng port. The end result is usually holding off with major updates... --anders _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
