Re: [AD] binary compatibility check for 4.2.x

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives ]



Elias Pschernig wrote:
On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 00:32 +0100, Evert Glebbeek wrote:
The following patch fixes the version check problems on the 4.2.x
branch.  Older binaries will run with newer libraries, but newer
binaries will not run with older libraries.  That's still the policy
for 4.2.x, right?
Right.

Was there anything else that needed to be done for 4.2.1?
Elias and Hans are tracking an X11 bug that I still need to check if I can reproduce here. Maybe it's not crucial to fix, but since it's a known bug I figured that we might just as well fix it. Other than that I think that's it. I'll do a sweep of my list of marked messages to make sure.


Maybe we can fix this for 4.2.1 still:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1401840&group_id=5665&atid=105665

It should be really simple from what I see, just need to replace the
hardcoded pathes with the one given in ./configure --prefix. I may get
around to write a patch tomorrow.


That would be great, we currently patch around it in Fedora, please note that using --prefix won't be enough though you really should use the value for --libdir see our patch: --- allegro-4.2.0/src/unix/umodules.c.64bit 2006-02-26 14:43:37.000000000 +
+++ allegro-4.2.0/src/unix/umodules.c   2006-02-26 14:44:26.000000000 +0100
@@ -44,7 +44,12 @@
 /* where to look for modules.lst */
 static char *module_path[] =
 {
-   "/usr/local/lib/allegro/", "/usr/lib/allegro/", NULL
+#ifdef __LP64__
+   "/usr/lib64/allegro/",
+#else
+   "/usr/lib/allegro/",
+#endif
+   NULL
 };

Notice how we use /usr/lib/xxxx for 32 bit and /usr/lib64/xxxx for 64 bit, although this patch works the correct fix really would be using the libdir as set bu ./configure.

Thanks & Regards,

Hans




Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+ http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/