Current-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: HEADS UP: I will be merging christos-time_t by the end of the week

On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 08:17:43AM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
> David Holland <> writes:
> > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 02:57:00AM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> >  > >What about structures that have inline time_t members? Otherwise
> >  > >this is a serious issue waiting to be hit. Just consider two different
> >  > >libraries, one old, one new, both using stat(2).
> >  > 
> >  > All have been versioned. Including rpc, etc.
> >
> > Are we going to do a mass revbump in pkgsrc?
> Why is this any different that any other change, like base system
> openssl bump?  If we revbump every package, should we be doing this for
> every incompatible change in every OS pkgsrc runs on?  I don't think
> we've ever (or certainly not usually) done this.
> One does need to build new packages when the OS changes, at least
> sometimes.  But a revbump won't fix that, because people who rebuild
> during the bump and then update to current won't get a rebuild.
> Probably we need to treat the base system as a virtual package with an
> ABI version and do some sort of unsafe_depends marking when updating the
> base.

I'm not familiar with what you mean by unsafe_depends.  How does it work?
I found a few mentions of how it gets set (by "make replace" apparently)
but I'm not seing much regarding what it actually does.


Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index