[arch-general] A suggestion for the devs regarding rebuilds

[fons at kokkinizita.net]

On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 12:27:57AM +0100, vlad wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 11:54:43PM +0100, fons at kokkinizita.net wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 12:36:55AM +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
> > 
> > > you are focusing only on .so which is different but this schema will
> > > work only if the package is split in lib, -dev, whatever as now, the
> > > headers will conflict since it have the same name on the same
> > > location.
> > 
> > Not true. When a new version is installed, the
> > headers are replaced, and the symlink from
> > 'libfoo.so' is modified to the new version.
> > 
> > In a link step you refer to the lib as '-lfoo'
> > which gets translated (via that symlink) into
> > 'libfoo.so.N', the newest installed version.
> > 
> > If you have separate -dev and -lib packages
> > (and Arch hasn't AFAICS) it is the package
> > manager's job to always replace both in sync.
> > Nothing magical about that, all distros I used
> > before just did it that way.
> > 

> Afais a pointless discussion. Arch _is_ a rolling distro.

Keeping the old *.so.1.2.3 and *.so.1 (and only those)
when a new version is installed is *not* contradictory
to being a rolling release. I'd even say that a rolling
release requires this even more than a fully versioned
one, where everything is replaced anyway if you update.

Ciao,

-- 
FA

O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !