Subject: Re: BUILDLINK_RECOMMENDED and SDL for aalib change
To: Jeremy C. Reed <email@example.com>
From: Thomas Klausner <wiz@NetBSD.org>
Date: 12/23/2005 17:41:04
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 08:32:14PM -0800, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> It appears the BUILDLINK_RECOMMENDED bump was missed for SDL's
> buildlink3.mk file for the aalib-x11 removal. Although the cvs log file
> mentions it. Was this intentional?
No, it was an oversight. I just fixed it.
> I am trying to understand the BUILDLINK_RECOMMENDED bumps for the
> aalib-x11 removal. Is this to force so programs will not end up using both
> libaa and libaa-x11 at same time?
No -- the SDL library changed library dependencies and buildlink3.mk
include files. If you still have an old SDL package installed, you cannot
compile new packages with the current pkgsrc buildlink3.mk file, because it
pulls in aalib and not aalib-x11, and sdl-config of the installed package
will still try to link against aalib-x11.
> Related, the smpeg and SDL_sound packages should DEPEND on aalib since the
> library is NEEDED directly (as shown by objdump). (Maybe other packages
> need to be checked also.) I can fix these after the freeze.
Does the code of smpeg or SDL_sound call aalib functions directly?
If not, I see no reason for them to depend on aalib, because they get
their dependency just because SDL needs it (and they get linked against
it automatically when they link against SDL).
> Also I see that games/gltron/Makefile was bumped, but it doesn't have
> NEEDED for any libaa. And I don't see any reference to laa or libaa in the
> gltron build.
It links against SDL. The idea was to have binary packages where one
sees that they are linked against the new SDL (with aalib) and not
the old SDL (with aalib-x11).