Subject: Re: BUILDLINK_RECOMMENDED and SDL for aalib change
To: Thomas Klausner <wiz@NetBSD.org>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/23/2005 12:10:46
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005, Thomas Klausner 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).
I see the source does not. I just thought this because the libaa was
directly NEEDED (not just as shown by recursive ldd).
>> 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).
Thinking about this again... I was mostly concerned because I know the
package would work because I had the dependencies available. And from a
different point of view: if a user has some packages that reference a
libaa-x11 that would not be good since they have no way to provide it now.
But in this case with gltron, I didn't think it mattered since it has no
reference to libaa or libaa-x11. But I guess this makes sure that there is
no chance of using a SDL_sound that needs a possibly missing libaa-x11.so.
If the libaa-x11 was not removed, then this bump would not be needed.
Jeremy C. Reed
BSD News, BSD tutorials, BSD links