Date:        Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:02:57 -0500 (CDT)
    From:        Frederick Bruckman <fredb@immanent.net>
    Message-ID:  <Pine.NEB.4.33.0108270933000.28568-100000@tautology.immanent.net>

  | Well, that depends on what version of libpng you had. If it's not too
  | old, you can safely _build_ against it,

Yes, of course - that's what the DEPENDS should be telling us in the
Makefile (however it gets included).   That's what make is for after all.

  | but we
  | shouldn't allow binary packages with binaries that are linked against
  | somethething other than "libpng.so.2.1".

Aside from being an occasional user (of ones I make myself) binary
packages, I know almost nothing about the way they work, but they
should depend upon the library version actually used to build
the package (and allow minor version bumps beyond that).  If the linker
is working correctly, avoiding serious problems because of this should
be semi-automatic - though having pgksrc (pkgbin perhaps...) upgrade
libraries when needed is definitely a feature.

The relationship between what is in the Makefile and what the binary
package gets built to use should not be text equality...

  | And what is a _package_ system, if it can't produce binary packages?

The current one, when it comes to libraries, is very weak.

kre