begin quote On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 21:57:42 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 05 February 2004 21:34, Spider wrote: > > begin quote > > On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 20:58:01 +0100 > > Can you explain more? When would LIBVER be set? by whom? (developer? > > no thanks.. :P ) and woudn't there need to be one LIBVER per .so > > file that a package installs? > > In most cases we could probably derive it automatically from the > soname of a library, in special cases LIBVER would need to be set. > Basically the idea breaks through the one LIBVER per .so by needing a > developer to define a different LIBVER when an incompatible library > change is introduced in the package (in any file) (the contents of > LIBVER don't matter). In some cases this will be automatically > detected, in some cases not, in which the developer needs to fix this. > I'm still not sure I actually understand how this would hang about. LIBVER would be created for the package at post-compile time, and would refer to its own contents... right? This could work, but in cases like : foolib.so.0 -> foolib.so.0.5.4 Which is LIBVER? 0, or 0.5.4 ? since if applications link to .so.0 the binaries will break if LIBVER is 0.5.4 (due to dependencies) but if it provides both, and a program links to the hard minor (0.5.4) , LIBVER would break if it was "0" ... This falls on the fact that all packages don't necessarily link to the same LIBVER , some may link to .so.0, others may be pickier and link to `foolib.so.0.5.4` .. Not a pretty situation. <SNIP> > > That would be "enhanced rpm style", which would probably work too. It > would however not solve the problem of determining which versions are > actually compatible (one could use sonames for that) No, that wouldn't be solved , but you'd at least have a "safety net" that catches you when you fall down to binaries. IE installing "foopack" won't be allowed if the contents wouldn't work (well, override flags, but I think that would be a bad thing. simply not having a --force would avoid some user-generated problems here ;) > > > and yes. its dirty. its rpmish. and I'd love to see a better > > thing. however, its better than the thing we have currently. > > Anything is better than nothing (which we have now) ;-) hehe :) > > Any ideas? > Don't have binary packages ;-) not very practical IMO. computers aren't that fast, yet. (and with software like KDE, Mozilla, qt, OpenOffice.. May never be) //Spider -- begin .signature This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. end
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
