On Aug 31, 2011, at 02:07, Anders F Björklund wrote: > Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >>> There's a sover bump around the corner, so it wanted >>> to make sure that the dependency is also upgraded... >>> I know that MacPorts now auto-upgrades everything, >>> and that it doesn't yet have versioned dependencies. >>> >>> But using port: dependencies seem like a step back, >>> since it's losing dependency information (i.e. "5") ? >> >> I'm not aware of this additional information ever having been helpful. >> >> lib:- and bin:-style dependencies would allow a file (in this case >> libfetch.5.dylib) located outside the MacPorts prefix to satisfy the >> dependency. We don't want that, so you should almost always use port:- or >> path:-style dependencies. > > Well, if you have a package depending on libfetch.5.dylib > and the package providing libfetch.5.dylib is upgraded to > libfetch.6.dylib the system is able to notice this and > complain about the missing dependency without a revupgrade.
I'm not aware of MacPorts having any code that does that. > If you don't have such version information in the dependencies, > you're at the mercy of detecting such linking errors at runtime > and upgrading the providing port. If a port is upgraded and it introduces a new library version, it is the responsibility of that committer to revbump all ports that use the library so they get rebuilt. > But I'm changing it to a port: > dependency, just gettting the +universal flags right first... _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
