Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue

[Ian Stakenvicius]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 07/07/12 07:29 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Zac Medico wrote:
>>>>>>> I'd suggest a special ebuild phase to check for ABI
>>>>>>> changes, like the pre_pkg_preinst_abi_check phase
>>>>>>> suggested here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=192319#c20
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess, that phase would detect ABI change and package
>>>>>> manager would know how to handle it by itself?
>>>
>>> Yeah, it would be like a warning system,
>>>
>>> And once we bump SLOT/ABI_SLOT, package manager would know
>>> about how to handle that situation and rebuild needed stuff?
>
> Is it unrealistic to assume that upstream ABI providers will mark
> their ABIs by using sonames correctly?
>
> Maybe that is at least the common case, then ABI_SLOT could be set
> automatically.
>
> Maybe I'm too far ahead, and baby steps are better.
>

Although we have a lot of this information available (which is why/how
@preserved-libs works, for instance), there is no way for portage to
know *prior to emerging the update* if abi has changed.  This is why
it needs to be specified in the ebuild somehow (and sub-slots via
4-slot-abi seem very capable of handling this)

That said, while experimenting with 4-slot-abi porting on my overlay,
usually I am just specifying the major (or sometimes major.minor)
version parts of the sonames, since that seems to make the most sense
usually.



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAk/4Q2IACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBzagD/blTq3Dq1K9Yrv2PdxSirxwu7
POUSNlLr59x8jKaE2oYBAIS+mATPRj3vn1W/uB37ipLmbg76gbcr7LTqh6Mb7Unv
=VKuj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----