Re: Liblapack.so, libblas.so etc. version numbers? (working on wip/cblas and wip/lapacke)

[Jason Bacon <outpaddling%yahoo.com@localhost>]

On 06/12/18 04:54, Dr. Thomas Orgis wrote:
> Am Mon, 11 Jun 2018 11:44:17 -0500
> schrieb Jason Bacon <outpaddling%yahoo.com@localhost>:
>
> > Shouldn't be too hard to determine the impact of an soversion change.
> > Since they all just include the bl3 file, should be a pretty easy fix
> > too.  The .4 symlink would probably do it, if it's even necessary.
> We can trigger all dependent packages to be re-built, right? Are there
> examples I can look at for the specifics? If it is acceptable to have
> them broken for a while until things are rebuilt, we can settle on
> that. If we even can trigger the .so.4 symlink being deleted after the
> rebuilds, it could be a clean affair with minimal breakage. Downside is
> that this has limited testing.
>
> How much of a no-go is an upgrade that replaces the .so.4 with an so.3
> and just tells users to rebuild things? Increment the revision of the
> dependent packages as trigger to rebuild on update?
>
>
> Alrighty then,
>
> Thomas
In pbulk, any change to the package will trigger a rebuild of dependents.
(I cringe any time there's an update to nbpatch, etc.)

I would think an increment of PKGREVISION should suffice for other builds.

Cheers,

    JB