[gentoo-project] Re: ABI deps and DEPEND labelling

[Steve Long]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:35:35 +0100
> Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote:
>> Posting to project as I think this stuff needs input from users as
>> well as devs. (Many users have a lot of experience with embedded dev
>> and ABI quirks.)
>> Flameeyes posted here about ABI deps:
>>
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/articles/2008/08/18/same-abi-and-any-abi-dependencies
>> ..which reminded me a lot of:
>> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=201499
>>
>> Not really fussed about how it's resolved, so long as we get some
>> sort of correct link dependency information (which compile-against is
>> not.) OFC that probably means we'll never get correct LDEPENDs but
>> such is life ;)
>>
>> What do others reckon about resolving ABI stuff, especially for
>> cross-dev and multi-lib/testing?
>
> You might find http://kloeri.livejournal.com/6771.html useful too.
>
Actually I found it depressing; you'll be wanting credit for readelf next..

http://git.exherbo.org/?p=exherbo.git;a=tree;f=scratch/multilib was a more
useful link, from which I got this:

 * econf now looks in ${S} for a configure script, as well as . and 
   ${ECONF_SOURCE}.
 * extra variables: ABI_CLASSES="C python ruby", for example, and C_ABIS,
   python_ABIS, ruby_ABIS. Also C_ABI, python_ABI, ruby_ABI for primary ABI
in
   each class.
 * additional functions: switch_abi_env, get_abi_var, with_all_abis

I recommend Gentoo people look at the notes file in the above dir.

One thing that puzzles me is I never see .so versioning mentioned, eg
libc.so.5 vs .6 linking to latest providing specified ABI.