"Jeffrey Smelser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, lets think about this for a minute.. You create a library for > others to use. When you deem a change necessary enough to bump > versions, this normally means you have changed the library in such a > way, that calls to it should change...
Minor version number bumps are supposed to *not* break binary compatibility with applications. > Wouldn't you think?? So are you really fixing the problem, or are you > to lazy recompile the programs so it works right.. I hope your not > going to be the guy later who gets hacked and says gentoo sucks > because their security is bad.. I just ran into this libssl problem today, and found that I couldn't rebuild the programs, since my version of wget wouldn't work anymore (due to the missing library). I had to to the link replacement as the parent poster did just to get the source fetcher to work (I clean my distfiles due to diskspace). > This is actually a ebuild bug and the old libs should be there.. but > are not.. So, doing a revdep-rebuild will recompile what you > want.. (removing the links first of course). Actually, I see it as a build bug, but I'm not too sure how to word it. The programs linked with libssl should be depending upon libssl.so.0 and not more specific versions. This is how dynamic libs are designed under unix, so something seems a bit odd that this even happened at all. Since libssl.so.0 is a link to the more detailed version number there would have been no problems. -- burton samograd http://kruhftwerk.dyndns.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
