svn commit: r364287 - head/ports-mgmt/pkg-devel

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 06:57:53PM +0200, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Aug 2014 17:44:57 +0100 Vsevolod Stakhov wrote:
> > On 07/08/14 17:40, Matthias Andree wrote:
> >> Am 07.08.2014 um 18:08 schrieb Vsevolod Stakhov:
> >>> Due to mainly [2] there are a lot of broken deps, for example, libxml2
> >>> provides libxml2.so.2.12, whilst all dependant ports requires
> >>> libxml2.so.2. Consequently, some weird packages, such as wine-i386-devel
> >>> are installed, since it pretends to provide libxml2.so.2 and due to [3]
> >>> and [1] wine is treated as a provide candidate.
> >> 
> >> The library's SONAME should be the canonical name because that gets
> >> recorded in another library's or executable's NEEDED tag, and pkg might
> >> be able to check at package creation, and again before install, if a
> >> file installing a library also installs a file that matches the SONAME.
> > 
> > That is how it works for shared lib requires. But that is not how it
> > works for shared lib provides. And this ambiguity is the source of [3].
> 
> Matthias is talking about the SONAME Elf field.  For libxml2.so.2.9.1
> it gives:
> 
> % objdump -p /usr/local/lib/libxml2.so.2.9.1  | grep SONAME
>   SONAME      libxml2.so.2
> 
> This is what is recorded in the NEEDED field of programs/libraries
> that depend on libxml2 and can be used for shared lib provides.
> 

That is exactly what we do use.

The problem is things like i386-wine are providing libxml2 as well which SONAME
is also libxml2.so.2 how do we differentiate both ?

To be honnest I have an idea on that but that requires modifications on the
ports tree side as well as pkg so it will have to wait a bit.

regards,
Bapt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-all/attachments/20140807/1a25c566/attachment.sig>