On 17-4-2021 14:16, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
Getting the port to build is one thing.
Right that is probably not very complicated.
But the API/ABI changes are indeed a pain.
Reason for all kinds of trouble with Ceph as well.
There used to be several versions of Boost in parallel.
Yes. I have no idea how easy that would be.
Neither do I, it is just a vague recollection.
But there must be more libraries with that same challenge?
The bigger part is, as you described:
So perhaps that is the best way to avoid having to deal with ABI/API
breakage...
After that it is up to the maintainers of the dependant packages to
update their package and start using boost-1.75.
There is the implicit assumption that a patch that updates
boost for all the dependent ports should also provide fixes
if those ports fail to build after the update. That is
the major task.
There are "only" 490 ports that have boost in their Makefile.
Or am I too simple in thinking this?
No.
The normal way would be to provide the patch, testbuild all the
depends, list the broken ports in the PR and then a small group of
folks can try to fix them one by one.
I have no experience in that.
Keeping up with Ceph is already quite a task, since that is a very fast
moving task.
--WjW
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
