On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 16:07 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Tomas Mraz (tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx) said:
> > I am going to build new openssl into rawhide really soon. As the new
> > version contains some minor ABI breaks it will require SONAME bump of
> > the openssl libraries. That also means all the 288 dependent packages
> > will have to be rebuilt. Not counting that some of the dependent
> > packages have circular dependencies.
> >
> > But do not be scared. As the ABI break is pretty minimal and as it
> > should not affect a large majority of applications I am going to
> > temporarily provide symlinks to the old library soname and appropriate
> > provides in the rpm package. Of course this will be dropped as soon as
> > all (or majority of) the dependencies are rebuilt.
>
> Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but is there a reason this couldn't
> have been done with:
>
> - a compatiblity openssl098g package?
I do not see a real need for such package except the third party
software support. We do not do compatibility packages for many other
important libraries either. But if anyone wants to maintain it feel free
to submit it for review and cc-me on the bugzilla entry, I will happily
review it.
> - a separate buildroot, and then merged?
Separate buildroot would not help alone - it would require either the
compat package or the temporary symlinks and provides anyway because of
the circular build dependencies.
I'm sorry that the first attempt at the temporary symlinks did not work
100%. But the openssl-0.9.8j-3.fc11 which is in the todays rawhide
should fix that.
--
Tomas Mraz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
Turkish proverb
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
