Subject: Re: glib2 and maybe a missed BUILDLINK_RECOMMENDED?
To: Julio M. Merino Vidal <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <email@example.com>
Date: 03/01/2005 09:49:05
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 08:15 -0800, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > (elrdet of tin.it mentioned gobject missing library on netbsd-help. This
> > reminded me that I forgot to send the following email that I composed on
> > Feb. 1.)
> > I packaged kino and then tried to run it on another system.
> > montecristo:/home/packages$ kino
> > kino: error while loading shared libraries: libgobject-2.0.so.400: cannot
> > open shared object file: No such file or directory
> Your kino package was built before the libtool naming scheme was
> changed (or "fixed", as I like to call it), and all the required
> revisions were bumped at that time. Looks like you have a mixture of
> packages in your system.
I packaged it on February 10. (The "1" above was a typo.)
And that was my point: "all the required revisions were bumped at that
time" except devel/glib2/buildlink3.mk appears to not have been modified.
Yes, I do have a mixture of packages on my system.
> > Update to 2.6.1 happened on Jan. 9. But buildlink3.mk has not been touched
> > for over eight months. It has:
> > BUILDLINK_DEPENDS.glib2+= glib2>=2.4.0
> That's ok, since 2.6 is binary-compatible with 2.4; in fact, it is
> compatible with any previous 2.x version. (Our buildlink3.mk is set
> to 2.4 because, by the time it was updated, we were still using the
> old naming scheme, thus the library name changed.)
Okay. That is good it is backward compatible. But the problem still exists
(or existed) because the installed files had different names from before
and after September's libtool change (libgobject-2.0.so.400 versus
libgobject-2.0.so.0.600.0, as one example).
Jeremy C. Reed
BSD News, BSD tutorials, BSD links