[blfs-dev] Upcoming BLFS-7.5 release

Ken Moffat zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com
Wed Mar 5 20:32:53 PST 2014


On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 04:18:45AM +0100, Armin K. wrote:
> 
> That's rather not correct.
> 
> If a package a is dynamically linked to package b and package b gets
> updated to new version that doesn't have an ABI break (soname in b v1.2
> is same as in b v1.0, ie libb.so.1), you *don't* need to recompile
> package a or anything else.
> 
> In case of ABI break (b v1.4 has libb.so.2 and b v1.2 has libb.so.1),
> only the packages that link against libb.so.1 have to be recompiled
> against libb.so.2, NOTHING ELSE.
> 
> In the gnutls case, you didn't need to recompile anything since there
> was no ABI break (there was, but it was reverted since it was not
> intentional).
> 
> So even when you upgrade glibc from version 2.12 to version 2.19, you
> don't need to rebuild anything, since libc.so.6 in 2.19 still exports
> the same interfaces it did in 2.12 and also some aditional ones that got
> introduced later, but they are not important since they are not used by
> the software compiled against 2.12.
> 
 That is a correct statement of how things ought to be.  But many
developers are like me - we make mistakes.  For a distro which ships
binaries, no big deal.  Similarly, fixing an existing BLFS-7.5 with
latest gnutls works.

 But there have been many cases over the years where minor changes
cause accidental breakage.  I'm thinking of changes to headers -
those sorts of things only show up when building a fresh system.
Based on your previous mail, I've moved gnutls, glib-networking, and
their required/recommended dependencies, to _much_ earlier in my
build so that I can hope to exercise most possible users.

ĸen
-- 
das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list