Subject: Re: buildlink3 now requires libgcrypt 1.2.0 or higher
To: Julio M. Merino Vidal <email@example.com>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/27/2004 10:00:54
> Now that we have non-recursive dependencies, we should only bump
> revisions for packages directly depending on a given one (in this
> case, opencdk).
> Yeah, it may happen that some packages that depend on a package that
> depends on opencdk break too. But if this happens, the former package
> was missing a direct dependency on opencdk, so it should be corrected.
> Isn't it?
That helps with all new packages.
But it doesn't help if you have an old package that has an open-ended
dependencies which allow it to work with newer packages that have
(Please see my other email in this thread for two ideas.)
By the way, if an "objdump -x" of a library shows NEEDED of a shared
library, then should we always include the package as a dependency (add
buildlink includes)? For example, evolution does not directly depend on
gnutls nor libgcrypt, but they are included as NEEDED by a evolution
library. (NEEDED only shows directly needed libraries. ldd would show all
the libraries used in addition recursively.)
Jeremy C. Reed
open source, Unix, *BSD, Linux training