Re: binary dependencies
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 02:38:04AM +0200, Eray Ozkural wrote:
> Hi Ben!
>
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 07:30:17PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> > My point was
> > that he cannot change the version of tcl that is program is *linked*
> > against. That has nothing to do with anything Debian could implement.
> >
>
> Just out of curiosity. Can't we just link to a generic library version
> if symbols are compatible!? Isn't this possible since symbols are resolved
> at link time? I mean, isn't there some way to do it?
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, because I don't know the exact specification of
> how that is done in linux/glibc. Though I did work with shared libraries
> on amiga and solaris before and my feeling is that this is doable. :)
> I only use libtool straightforward on debian and just know how to use shared
> libs :)
If that were possible, don't you think someone would already be doing
it? In fact it is possible, if it is done from the start. A good example
is glibc using versioned symbols. As I said though, this doesn't just
magically appear, and no other library that I know of besides glibc uses
versioned symbols. And NO, Debian is not going to start making a
practice of versioning upstream libraries and tracking symbol ABI
changes.
> > If all you have is a *script*, then do "Depends: tclsh", and viola, it
> > works.
>
> Hmm. Yes, that's what I'd done. My comments were general, though. Just
> reflections on where include dirs, libs, docs, tcl packages, etc. should be...
What does that have to do with this? It has nothing to do with the
originators question, which is more important than a rant about library
locations and versions.
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: