On 26.04.2015 11:05 PM, Jeremy Sequoia wrote: >> On Apr 26, 2015, at 13:47, Mihai Moldovan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 26.04.2015 10:34 PM, Jeremy Sequoia wrote: >>>> On Apr 26, 2015, at 13:15, David Evans <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 4/26/15 11:39 AM, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: >>>>> The new portaudio breaks dependents. >>>>> >>>>> pulseaudio now installs ${prefix}/lib/pulseaudio/libpulsecommon-6.0.dylib >>>>> instead of ${prefix}/lib/pulseaudio/libpulsecommon-5.0.dylib >>>>> >>>>> Are those two files really ABI incompatible, or is this yet another case >>>>> of upstream developers failing to version their binaries correctly? >> >> Maybe, the new version doesn't necessarily mean ABI compatibility was broken >> (at least in PulseAudio-land.) > > Sounds like this is likely an upstream error where they incorrectly use the > release version instead of an ABI version.
08:30 < tanuk> Ionic: No, the release number is not connected to the ABI version, and libpulsecommon-5.0.so and libpulscommon-6.0.so are not binary compatible. 08:30 < tanuk> libpulsecommon does not provide a public API, so the compatibility doesn't matter. 08:30 < tanuk> libpulse is backwards compatible with earlier versions. Why did it break dependents, then? Or rather, why is any dependent linking to libpulsecommon?! Actually, libpulse has a correctly set up compat version: /opt/local/lib/libpulse.0.dylib (compatibility version 19.0.0, current version 19.0.0) Mihai
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
