On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 01:34:34PM -0500, Ziller, James wrote:
> So then is there a way that the ports/package system can automatically
> handle replacing libfoo.so.3 with libfoo.so.4, so that packages compiled to
> use libfoo.so.3 can use libfoo.so.4 instead (assuming the new version is
> backward compatable)?
You can't assume that. The version numbers of libraries are only
supposed to be changed when the new version is *NOT* backwards
compatible with the old.
I.e. libfoo.so.4 is most likely not completely compatible with
libfoo.so.3 and any programs that are compiled against libfoo.so.3 need
to be recompiled to use libfoo.so.4
> Or can the port link against say libfoo.so (which
> should be a symlink to the version of the library that's installed)?
> Thanks for the responses,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles Swiger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 1:18 PM
> To: Ziller, James
> Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: Re: Dependency hell
> On Apr 19, 2004, at 10:28 AM, Ziller, James wrote:
> > So in other words I do have to recompile everything that depends on a
> > given
> > library just because that library is updated to a slightly newer
> > version?:(
> Well, you could simply use the old version of the library.
> It's not especially hard to write code in a way that maintains upwards
> compatibility-- putting a version # or sizeof(struct foo) in structures
> being passed around helps!-- but some projects don't bother.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<Insert your favourite quote here.>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"