On Mon, 2012-02-20 at 01:23:36 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 03:39:38PM -0500, Sahil Tandon wrote: > > On Sun, 2012-02-19 at 19:11:06 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > > So far it seems that my assessments are not being counterargued with > > > valid technical points and facts. > > > > Let me point you, once again, to the thread on freebsd-ports in which > > arguments have already been made against specifying library numbers in > > LIB_DEPENDS. For me, mi@ and dougb@'s arguments are more compelling > > than yours. > > "Wine argument" does not sound too technical to me.
I have no clue what that means, but at this juncture it is irrelevant. > I asked a question, how can one guarantee if some arbitrary port is > ABI dependent or not. I have not heard the answer so far. I myself > do not see it either. Thus, the whole point that specifying exact ABI > version might not be required is moot. Thus, it's safer to always > specify it. At least it allows to catch versions inconsistencies > earlier. No, it is not always safer to specify it; and by the time I saw your latest contribution to this thread, I see that dougb@ has done a splendid job of trying to explain the opposing viewpoint to you rather clearly. I trust that has satiated your desire for people to repeat the technical components of discussion that had already been archived on freebsd-ports. -- Sahil Tandon _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "cvs-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
