[csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) bind

[Philip Brown]

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>> Soooo... this makes me curious.
>> libbind-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17
>>
>> prior version of libbind, is
>> it has libbind9.so.0.0.50
>>
>> This version is a mere minor patch level.. 1 month later... but it has
>> an INCOMPATIBLE shared library version?
>> libbind9.so.60
>
> Aren't you looking at 9.6? I see /opt/csw/lib/libbind9.so.60.0.1 in 9.7.0.
>

okay, I'm taking a fresh look.

latest packages,

libbind-9.7.0P1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz

contains  /opt/csw/lib/libbind9.so.60.0.1
It has SONAME of libbind9.so.60. Or at least, that's what the
bind-utils stuffs need, explicitly.

So apparently, minor rev numbers these days are important.
Looking at what is in current...
huh. only the .60 as you say.  Perhaps I was indeed looking in stable
by mistake.

but wait... there is no libbind in stable.

What was I looking at?!?? this is Very Odd.
oh.. OOPS!  I was seeing the sun shipped libbind packages! didnt know
they had them now!
sorry about that.

erm. but that has libbind9.so.0.0.10
I think there was a Much Older, now disappeared package of CSWlibbind installed.
and THAT had .50 libs in it.

Which makes me worry.

hmm.not that much older.

libbind-9.6.1P3,REV=2010.01.25

But I SUPPOSE, since nothing depends on libbind, but CSWbind, and
CSWbindutils, that the rambling SONAME changes are okay to do.

(makes me rather sickened with the quality control of the BIND
people... but unfortunately, nothing to do there)