Hi John, Sorry for not making things clear before the arc submission.
Previously, we submitted the arc case LSARC/2008/782 to integrate WebKit 1.0.x to OpenSolaris for GNOME 2.26. Actually, there was no official release for WebKit GTK port at that time. We just grabbed the version information from configure.ac: m4_define([webkit_major_version], [1]) m4_define([webkit_minor_version], [0]) m4_define([webkit_micro_version], [3]) and considered it to be 1.0.3. The community didn't update the library version information back then as suggested by the GNU community[1], since everything was still under development without any release. The WebKit library version stayed "LIBWEBKITGTK_VERSION=1:0:0" for some time. Later on, GNOME community decided to delay the WebKit integration until GNOME 2.28. So we didn't integrate WebKit and also postponed the schedule. Since WebKit 1.1.x, the community decided to break ABI compatibility (refer to ChangeLog) and add some new major features (migrate from libcURL to libsoup, HTML5 media elements support etc.). Most importantly, they started to provide tarball releases. The 1.1.1 release should be the time when the library version was bumped from libwebkit-1.0.so.1 to libwebkit-1.0.so.2 (LIBWEBKITGTK_VERSION=2:0:0). Since then, they followed the suggestions from GNU to update the library version for each tarball releases, up until the latest one 1.1.11 (LIBWEBKITGTK_VERSION=10:0:8=>/usr/lib/libwebkit-1.0.so.2.8.0). The library will stay at "libwebkit-1.0.so.2" until the next major release. The "current"[1] and "age"[1] of the library version should keep changing in future 1.1.x release. So the WebKit library file will be "/usr/lib/libwebkit-1.0.so.2.x.0". Hi Jim, I'm not sure which WebKit version will be integrated as the community releases source tarball release frequently (the latest one is 1.1.11). That's the reason we put 1.1.x in the arc case. If the interfaces are changed in future WebKit 1.1.x release, I think another arc case will be necessary. As John mentioned, we usually follow what the community choose to do. The header files are installed to /usr/include/webkit-1.0 with the community release tarball, and the pc file is still called libwebkit-1.0.pc. This might be the community convention. We could take a look at GTK+ for comparison. The GTK+ version on my OpenSolaris b118 box is now 2.16.1. And: $ ls -ld /usr/include/gtk-2.0/ drwxr-xr-x 6 root bin 6 2009-04-29 17:14 /usr/include/gtk-2.0/ $ ls -l /usr/lib/pkgconfig/gtk+-2.0.pc -rw-r--r-- 1 root bin 359 2009-06-21 01:40 /usr/lib/pkgconfig/gtk+-2.0.pc Since there is no official WebKit 1.0.x release, I think it should be fine to still use webkit-1.0 to refer to 1.x release. As for the header files, I just compare the new pkgmap with the old one. They contain the same set of files. On the other hand, the "Exported Interface" /usr/include/webkit-1.0 was declared to be Volatile in the previously arc. I think it's not necessary to list the file changes in that folder. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Hope this address all the questions. Best Regards, -Alfred [1] http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Updating-version-info.html#Updating-version-info. On 07/24/09 04:20 AM, John Fischer wrote: > Jim, > > Most of these I can not answer but I can answer the library version > question because I asked it prior to the fast track submission. I'll > let the project team answer the others and they can correct me if I > am wrong. Note, I am not part of this project just know enough about > it to answer some of these issues. > > To build the project the team uses the JDS build environment which > uses a spec file. The spec file usually simply packages what ever is > built during the build process. Thus if a component of the project > installs into a versioned directory then the packaging will reflect > that fact. Most of your questions revolve around why things are > installed into a specific versioned directory or file and should > now be answered. > > Furthermore, the project team is simply following what is being done > within the community. The community bumped the version of the library > from libwebkit-1.0.so.1 to libwebkit-1.0.so.2. Thus the project team > followed suite. I had hoped that they would have explained this > within the proposal prior to submission because it is a fairly obvious > ARC type of question. > > Thanks, > > John > > > > > > Jim Walker wrote: > >> John Fischer wrote: >> >>> Jim, >>> >>> The OSD (formerly JDS) group will have both a regular end user package >>> and a developer package. The developer package will typically contain >>> things relating to header files, package configuration scripts and >>> sometimes developer documentation. Other packages that you will see >>> with the OSD group will be root (and used to have doc) packages. >>> >> Thanks John. >> >> This brings up another point. This case is a delta case for >> LSARC/2008/782. >> >> http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/LSARC/2008/782/mail >> >> What version of WebKit will be included in the package(s)? >> >> It looks like 1.1.11 is the current version. >> >> Are there any header file changes, so the header file directory >> should at least be listed? >> >> Is this directory going to continue to be used? >> >> /usr/include/webkit-1.0 >> >> Are these files going to continue to be used? >> >> /usr/lib/pkgconfig/webkit-1.0.pc >> /usr/lib/${MACH64}/pkgconfig/webkit-1.0.pc >> >> libwebkit-1.0* is being used in the library naming instead of >> libwebkit-1.1* why? >> >> Cheers, >> Jim >>
