On Mar 10, 2007, at 8:42 AM, Yves de Champlain wrote:
The fact that API/ABI compatibility is frequently broken is an ugly little secret of our business and somebody, somewhere, always ends up dealing with it. For fan-out reasons alone, that someone should be as far upstream as possible.Agree on that, who wants to do a clean reinstall of /opt/local because libiconv was upgraded ?
because someone forced you to upgrade libiconv?The image mode solution Jordan is proposing would let you upgrade libiconv without breaking anything, but you really wouldn't be upgrading libiconv (as everything you previously built against it would still be using the old version).
Maybe the last check is useful as a hint for the maintainer at best, but there are many things that could be checked and handled directly. Portfiles could include a flag for backward incompatibilities.
... which assumes that the port maintainers are going to know whenever an API/ABI change occurs in their port (which I doubt is true for all ports - and I don't know of an automated way we can improve the macports infrastructure to really help here).
-- Daniel J. Luke +========================================================+ | *---------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------* | | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* | +========================================================+ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | +========================================================+
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
