1 |
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001 21:04:22 -0700 |
2 |
Michael M Nazaroff <naz@×××××××××××××××××.net> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> I trying to figure out whats wrong with the libgd-1.8.3-r2.ebuild. I've |
5 |
|
6 |
> submitted a patch to make it work on probably most peoples machines. |
7 |
But |
8 |
> orginally the syntax was ~media-libs/freetype-1.3.1 in the ebuild, which |
9 |
if |
10 |
> you have freetype-2.0.1 installed won't pulll down freetype-1.3.1 even |
11 |
though |
12 |
> they are diffirent libs...is this a bug ? I've tried the syntax |
13 |
> ~media-libs/freetype-1 and ~/media-libs/freetype-1.3 as recommended by |
14 |
> Azarah. I've check this problem on someone else machines and it's |
15 |
consistant |
16 |
> with mine. The library libgd-1.8.3 won't build because it won't pull |
17 |
down |
18 |
> freetype-1.3.1 before hand to build against. My fix for it simply |
19 |
consisted |
20 |
> of changing ~media-libs/freetype-1.3.1 to =media-libs/freetype-1.3.1-r3 |
21 |
|
22 |
The reason you have not got a clear answer to this problem, is that it is |
23 |
a bit tricky, and we are working on getting Portage to handle it |
24 |
gracefully. |
25 |
|
26 |
For all of this to work seamlessly in the end, we will have to allow |
27 |
installation of both freetype-1.3.x and 2.0.x; it might be that all 1.x |
28 |
are interchangeable and all 2.x are interchangeable, or it might be that |
29 |
only 1.3.x are interchangeable. |
30 |
|
31 |
There is also a very nasty problem here that pops up in some of our |
32 |
packages (kissme, openoffice): |
33 |
foo-1.0 depends on bar-1.0.1, cannot build with any other bar version |
34 |
baz-1.0 depends on bar-1.0.2, cannot build with any other bar version |
35 |
|
36 |
bar-1.0.1 and bar-1.0.2 cannot be installed at the same time. |
37 |
|
38 |
For instance, openoffice will only work with stlport 4.0. stlport 4.5 (the |
39 |
most recent) cannot coexist (easily) with 4.0. |
40 |
|
41 |
We really would like to handle this in the general case. |
42 |
|
43 |
For now we've more or less said that we want to allow libraries to be |
44 |
installed with multiple (minor) versions; say libfoo-1.3 and libfoo-1.2 |
45 |
can coexist, but |
46 |
libfoo-1.3.1 and libfoo-1.3.2 cannot. There is no reason why we should |
47 |
build that restriction into Portage itself. We can very well leave up to |
48 |
the ebuild developer whether his libfoo-1.3.1 and libfoo-1.3.2 should be |
49 |
able to coexist. |
50 |
The point is that we are working on a mechanism for the ebuild developer |
51 |
to tell which versions of his packages are interchangeable and which |
52 |
aren't. |
53 |
|
54 |
|
55 |
Regards, |
56 |
|
57 |
Karl T |