Subject: more broken packages due to wrong libraries (libgsf and libcroco)
To: None <tech-pkg@netbsd.org>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <reed@reedmedia.net>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 05/27/2004 11:16:44
May I commit the following?

--- graphics/librsvg2/buildlink3.mk	1 Apr 2004 18:37:09 -0000	1.5
+++ graphics/librsvg2/buildlink3.mk	27 May 2004 18:14:05 -0000
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
 BUILDLINK_PACKAGES+=	librsvg2

 .if !empty(LIBRSVG2_BUILDLINK3_MK:M+)
-BUILDLINK_DEPENDS.librsvg2+=	librsvg2>=2.6.3
+BUILDLINK_DEPENDS.librsvg2+=	librsvg2>=2.6.3nb2
 BUILDLINK_PKGSRCDIR.librsvg2?=	../../graphics/librsvg2
 .endif	# LIBRSVG2_BUILDLINK3_MK

(Or should I use BUILDLINK_RECOMMENDED.librsvg2 ?)

I updated libgsf and libcroco because needed by a new nautilus I am
building.

I had libcroco-0.5.0 installed. I now installed libcroco-0.5.1.

I had libgsf-1.8.2nb7 installed and now I installed libgsf-1.9.1.

I installed my old librsvg2-2.6.3. And now objdump -x tells me that old
/usr/lib/librsvg-2.so.8.3 needs:
  NEEDED      libgsf-1.so.9
  NEEDED      libcroco.so.2

And ldd says:
        libgsf-1.so.9 => not found
        libcroco.so.2 => not found

librsvg2-2.6.3 has open-ended depends:
  libcroco>=0.5.0
  libgsf>=1.8.2nb3

And nautilus only needed librsvg2>=2.6.3.

The May 5 update of libgsf did changed from lib/libgsf-1.so.9.2
to lib/libgsf-1.so.10.0. The BUILDLINK_DEPENDS was correctly updated on
same day.

The April 19 update of libcroco changed from lib/libcroco.so.2.0 to
lib/libcroco.so.3.0. And the BUILDLINK_DEPENDS.libcroco was properly
updated on same day.

My libgsf is used by gnumeric-1.2.2. objdump tells me that it needs:
  NEEDED      libgsf-gnome-1.so.9
  NEEDED      libgsf-1.so.9
And ldd says:
        libgsf-gnome-1.so.9 => not found
        libgsf-1.so.9 => not found

I see that jmmv properly "Bump[ed] PKGREVISION due to libgsf update to
1.9.0 (soname of shared library changed)" for librsvg2 on May 5. And also
on April 19: "Bump PKGREVISION due to libcroco's update (major version
bump in library name)." This is good. Thank you!

But the librsvg2/buildlink3.mk was never bumped. Is it okay if I do the
following?
BUILDLINK_DEPENDS.librsvg2+=    librsvg2>=2.6.3nb2

Or should I use BUILDLINK_RECOMMENDED.librsvg2 ?

Or should I use >-2.6.5 for BUILDLINK_RECOMMENDED or BUILDLINK_DEPENDS?

(gnumeric was never bumped. But too late now to make a difference, since
it was updated to 1.2.12 a couple weeks later.)

 Jeremy C. Reed

 	  	 	 BSD News, BSD tutorials, BSD links
	  	 	 http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/