[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Pkg-haskell-maintainers] libffi soname change upcoming

On 08/23/2011 09:16 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
> Am Dienstag, den 23.08.2011, 20:58 +0200 schrieb Matthias Klose:
>> as shown in bug #639015, haskell packages make up to 80% of the libffi rdepends,
>> which looks a bit insane.  At some time I would like to get the libffi version
>> in experimental to unstable, maybe it's worth either waiting until this issue is
>> fixed, or coordinate the libffi soname bump or the haskell abi transition (there
>> seem to be plenty of it ;)
> ok, that explains your motivation :-)
> The question that has to be answered first is: Assume the libraries do
> not depend on libffi themselves, and only ghc does. Now you update
> libffi and ghc gets rebuilds, what will happen:
>  A) The haskell ABIs stay the same, the existing library packages can
> still be used. Great.
>  B) The haskell ABIs change. We’ll have to binNMU all Haskell libraries,
> but oh well, not bad thanks to BD-Uninstallable-support in wanna-build
> and autosigning.
>  C) The haskell ABIs do not change, but the old library builds are
> broken nevertheless. Big mess. Hard to recover from, because builds are
> not ordered automatically any more. Needs lots of NMUes and Dep-Waits.

sorry, I don't get the `C' case. why should these be broken by a libffi or
libgmp change?

> Removing the libffi dependencies from the haskell libraries makes C
> possible and only helps with A. So until someone investigates this, I’d
> rather err on the safe side, leave the dependencies in, and fix the
> issue by rebuilding all haskell libraries when you upload the new ffi
> soname to unstable.

well, with binNMU orgies like this you'll pull in any new or tightened
dependencies for shared libraries. Not depending on these unused libraries
does avoid this.


Reply to: