On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 22:07:21 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> I maintain two package, OpenImageIO and OpenColorIO, which can optionally
> depend on each other. During the review process I intentionally decided
> that it was more important for OpenImageIO to depend on OpenColorIO as it
> uses the latter for color management.
>
> OpenColorIO is not a library, but a binary requirement. It can optionally
> build two binaries that use OpenImageIO. Until now this has not been a
> problem but now I have gotten a request to build the binaries.
Ok, I slightly misspoke here, OpenColorIO is a library, but the only dependency on OpenImageIO is from the utility binaries...
It may be even easier. You only need a buildroot override, if the>
> This almost seems to be bootstrapping but I'm not quite sure I need to go
> that far...
>
> Since both are established packages, if one is updated, wouldn't the only
> consequence be that once I build the updated package, I would need to also
> rebuild the other package (after adding the former as a buildroot override).
>
> Am I missing something, or is it that easy?
build of OpenImageIO that's available in the buildroot (since it has
been published before) is not API-compatible with what OpenColorIO wants.
For future updates/upgrades of OpenImageIO, rebuilds of OpenColorIO would
only be needed for ABI/API changes in OpenImageIO.
Thanks! I was hoping it was that easy. Upstream is pretty good about not breaking API/ABI but I usually check with abi-compliance-checker anyway since OpenImageIO is needed by blender and I'm not the primary maintainer for it.
Thanks,
Richard
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
