On Sat, 2012-06-16 at 17:24 +0200, Peter Stuge wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Also, can we stop using the term "ABI" in reference to this please? > > It's misleading. Let's call them sub-slots instead. > > I think ABI fits well though? The situation is that A DEPENDs on B, > and at some point B changes in a way that A must be rebuilt in order > to run - right? At least for dev-ruby/nokogiri this is not the case. It checks the version of libxml2 it was built against versus the one it finds at runtime and starts to issue warnings if they don't match, but it will still run. So it would be a good idea to automatically update nokogiri after libxml2 to avoid cluttering logfiles and cron emails. But the ABI didn't change. dev-ruby/rmagick does something similar for imagemagick but actually refuses to run, even if the ABI would stay the same. Hans
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
