On 05/08/16 22:47, Felipe Sateler wrote: > On 5 August 2016 at 17:24, James Cowgill <jcowg...@debian.org> wrote: >> On 05/08/16 21:03, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: >>> Hi Sebastian, >>> >>> I did a fresh build of libva-1.7.1-1~bpo+1 today, and noticed that it >>> was building against mesa-10.3.2-1+deb8u1 from Jessie. I've been >>> testing it on a Jessie+backported mesa-11.1.3-1~bpo8+1, and the >>> packages I've been testing have also been built against mesa-10.3.x. >>> Do you think it's ok to build against mesa 10.3.2, or should we bump >>> the build deps of libva to pull in mesa from jessie-backports. I'm in >>> favour of bumping the deps asap. Additionally, I think it would also >>> be wise to bump the intel-vaapi-driver build-depend on libdrm-dev to >>> prevent it from being built against libdrm-2.4.58-2. >> >> Why? You realize that building against a newer version of mesa/libdrm >> won't affect the dependencies on the final package? > > In backports, it does. Dependencies are statisfied from stable if > possible, thus the build-depends needs to be tightened to force use of > the backported library.
What I mean is that build-depending on a more recent package version doesn't necessarily[1] mean that version will be required at runtime and reflected in the Depends: lines. For example, mesa doesn't insert any dependencies into the users of libgl1-mesa-glx, so bumping the build-dependency will have no affect on the version of the package actually used at runtime. So if the downstream package doesn't use any new features in the more recent library, why bump the build-dependency? [1] It is possible to do this through symbols files, but neither libdrm or mesa do. James
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
