[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/x11
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 00:21:12 +0900, Aleksey Cheusov <vle%gmx.net@localhost>
Why not put buildlink with openssl in qt4-libs/buildlink3.mk?
(BUILDLINK_ABI_DEPENDS.qt4-libs had been bumped though)
Then, need to recursive bump?
Before commit, I tested a few kde applications. They were built successfully
and worked fine. So, I didn't see a reason
for putting openssl to qt4-libs/buildlink3.mk. Those who need it
can ".include" appropriate bl3 explicitely.
Recursive revision bump. Packages that do not need openssl support in qt4 were
built successfully. Those who need it -- failed on systems having no openssl in
I _presume_ old packages should work fine with new qt4-libs.
It is unlikely that adding support for openssl breaks
ABI. What's the reason for recursive bump?
Testing qt4/kde packages under NetBSD for build failures?
If old pakcages works fine with new qt4-libs, it means ABI compatible.
Why do you think that the change breaks ABI?
I did not still try to build any qt4/kde packages, because I just
build packages only if its PKGVERSION is bumped.
If some packages had been changed (ex, new features will be enabled)
with new qt4-libs (QtNetworks with OpenSSL), I feel that
those packages should API depend on new qt4-libs and be bumped PKGREVISION.
OBATA Akio / obache%NetBSD.org@localhost
Main Index |
Thread Index |