RE: buildlink3 confusion

["Larson, Timothy E." <TELarson%west.com@localhost>]

Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> I don't know the details for SDL also. But since you mention "building
> will compile" that refers to 
> BUILDLINK_API_DEPENDS.SDL+=     SDL>=1.2.5nb5
> so as far as we know, it can work with older APIs (back to around
> 1.2.5). 
> 
> The concern is for end-users who use ready-to-use packages and do not
> compile (build from source). 
> 
> I had a quick look at the library filenames for the 1.2.9nb2 package
> versus the 1.2.11nb1 package and the shared library names and SONAMEs
> are changed. From what I see, a binary package that was build against
> SDL   
> 1.2.9 (because of USE_ABI_DEPENDS=NO) would not work with SDL 1.2.11
> package). 
> 
> This is 1.2.9nb2:
>  libSDL.so.2
>  libSDL.so.2.0.9
> 
> This is 1.2.11nb1:
>  libSDL-1.2.so.0
>  libSDL-1.2.so.0.11.0
> 
> (I use USE_ABI_DEPENDS=NO myself but can't/wouldn't share the binary
> packages publicly.) 

OK, so for purposes of my current work to create a package, I could
export USE_ABI_DEPENDS=NO so as to avoid rebuilding SDL right now, and
that would be fine.  But the resulting package as used by others
(assuming it were committed to pkgsrc today) would install/update SDL to
1.2.11nb1.  Is that how it would work?

Thanks,
Tim
-- 
Tim Larson
InterCall, a subsidiary of West Corporation
Eschew obfuscation!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
pkgsrc-wip-discuss mailing list
pkgsrc-wip-discuss%lists.sourceforge.net@localhost
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pkgsrc-wip-discuss