postfix +tls upgrade broken

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Apr 4, 2009, at 02:20, Rainer Müller wrote:

> On 2009-04-03 15:07, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>> On Apr 2, 2009, at 7:01 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>>> But in general, this is how the final update to openssl @1.0.0 will
>>> go.
>>> Every dependent need to be rebuild as usually for every upgrade.  
>>> Just
>>> that in this case it will affect many ports and will probably cause
>>> much
>>> confusion at first.
>>>
>>> I don't think there is a better solution currently than advising to
>>> run
>>> 'sudo port -R upgrade openssl' when it is released, even if it will
>>> probably trigger a lot of unnecessary rebuilds.
>>
>> In the past, we have rev-bumped every port that we thought would need
>> a rebuild when we've done something like this...

Or written it up as a hot problem, e.g.:

http://trac.macports.org/wiki/ 
ProblemHotlist#Aportfailedtobuildupgradeorrunwithamessagereferringtolibi 
ntl.3.dylib


> For the readline @5.2 -> @6.0 upgrade I added additional symlinks  
> to the
> old libreadline.5.x.dylib paths. I tested it before with the ports
> installed on my machine and as it worked for all of them I decided  
> to go
> that way. Might just have been coincidence that the versions were  
> still
> compatible... Maybe not the best solution, but it saved a lot of  
> hassle.

I've been wary of that, in fact. The only reason I know of for  
upstream to use a new library version number is if it's not binary  
compatible with the old version, so I would think creating such a  
symlink would cause problems. Maybe in the case of readline there was  
something special, but I wouldn't expect that to work generally.