> On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 05:22:29PM +0200, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
> > On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 17:43:41 +0000, Richard Rauch wrote:
> > 
> > >  * Use "make replace" on key libraries that you know or
> > >    suspect will need to be updated.  (Note that this is a
> > >    bit dangerous, but lets you get the library updated
> > >    without rebuilding everything that it requires.)
> > 
> > Why is it a bit dangerous? I never saw an explanation.
> 
> I don't know what other aspects may lurk in the mechanics of
> pkgsrc, but if you are updating a shared library the API may
> change.  Some shared libraries (some? ...hm) on UNIX like systems
> neither maintain rigorous backwards compatibility nor use the
> library versioning scheme properly.

From the previous post (by John R. Shannon) I got the impression that
"make replace" will break programs even if the package providing the
shared library uses the versioning scheme properly. If this is not true,
then OK.

> Again, there may be other issues that I'm not aware of.  But I'm
> pretty sure that the above is valid and real enough to require
> some concern if you are setting up a computer system for others
> to use.

I do not think that is a major problem. If somebody changes the ABI of a
library without changing the version in SONAME, then it is simply a bug
like any other bug. pkgsrc can't protect you from bugs. Also, such bugs
will be hopefully rare and soon caught by some of the numerous Linux or
BSD distributions.

On the other hand, if "make replace" breaks the depending programs even if
the SONAME is changed properly, that would be unfortunate.

Thanks and bye	Pavel