Issue with the pkgng repository

[Matthew Seaman]

On 04/12/2012 20:52, Walter Hurry wrote:
> I have another minor issue with pkgng:
> 
> Say package foo-1.0 depends on bar-1.0. Then bar-1.0 is upgraded to 
> version 1.1.
> 
> So a new package bar-1.1 is built (from the port), and replaces bar-1.0 
> in the repository. The repository database is then updated using 'pkg 
> repo'. 
> 
> Now the repository database is out of whack: It still thinks foo-1.0 
> depends on bar-1.0 (the deps table in the compressed repo.sqlite database 
> - i.e. repo.txz in the repository).
> 
> Admittedly the packages will still install (from the repository in 
> question) on another machine, but nevertheless it doesn't seem quite 
> right.
> 
> One workaround is to re-create the foo package (plus any others depending 
> on bar) and refresh the repository, but is this an omission?

This is a flaw in your package repository maintenance process.  If
bar-1.0 is upgraded to bar-1.1 then you should rebuild all the packages
that have a direct dependency on it, and possibly many of the packages
that have an indirect dependency too.  I say 'rebuild' because that is
generally what happens in practice, even though in many cases you could
probably get away with simply repackaging everything that requires bar-1.x.

Not always though, and it's hard to tell the difference programatically
in the general case.  If, for example, bar-1.0 provides libbar.so.1 and
bar-1.1 provides libbar.so.2 then full rebuilds are definitely required
for anything that ultimately links against libbar.so.  And to discover
that 100% accurately, you have to examine the dynamic linkage
characteristics of every ELF file in every package with bar-1.x
somewhere in its dependency tree.  (No, LIB_DEPENDS cannot be relied on
for this) That's just once example reason why you might need a full
rebuild.  There are many more.  Which is why it is standard to just punt
and rebuild everything that requires bar-1.x.

Tracking this sort of stuff manually is pretty tedious.  Which is why
things like poudriere and tinderbox exist; so you can automate.

	Cheers,

	Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.

PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey
JID: matthew at infracaninophile.co.uk

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 266 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20121204/fadcf88f/attachment.sig>