On Tue, 7 May 2002, Thomas Klausner wrote:

> I was tempted to update the buildlink-dependency to 1.2.10nb1, too.
> Now I'm not so sure anymore -- why do we have to update the
> PKGREVISION of dependant packages? For binary packages? (Do we still
> need it after we got @blddep?) Is there no better way?

Right now if you build a package against glib-1.2.10, you're linking
against libglib.so.13.10. The wildcard dependency in the resulting
binary package says you can use glib-1.2.8, which is to say
libglib.so.13.8. You're not supposed to do that. Sometimes, you can
get away with going backwards, but in this case, gtk+ builds against
the new interface if it's available, so for anything that depends on
gtk+, you *really* can't do that. For glib/gtk+, there's probably no
good reason why you would want to allow skew between them, anyways.

@blddep doesn't help with the fundamental problem. If you already have
packages installed against glib-1.2.8, but then you need to upgrade
glib/gtk+ for a new galeon package, you still have to rebuild
everything. For the sake of the binary package users, all these things
need to be rebuilt on the server too. Moreover, if you only bump the
dependency hidden in the buildlink files, a bulk build won't update
the dependents as it should. Even if it did, confusion would reign, as
the user could still have packages built against any combination that
the dependencies allow.

Frederick