#28000 closed update (fixed)
update poppler to 0.16.0
| Reported by: | florian@… | Owned by: | dbevans (David B. Evans) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Low | Milestone: | |
| Component: | ports | Version: | |
| Keywords: | haspatch | Cc: | rmstonecipher@… |
| Port: | poppler |
Description
See attached patch. I hope this does not break any packages depending on a specific poppler version.
Attachments (2)
Change History (10)
Changed 14 years ago by florian@…
| Attachment: | Portfile.diff added |
|---|
comment:1 Changed 14 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
| Cc: | devans@… removed |
|---|---|
| Owner: | changed from macports-tickets@… to devans@… |
comment:2 Changed 14 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
| Cc: | rmstonecipher@… added |
|---|
Ryan, did you test that dependents still work after r75618?
comment:3 Changed 14 years ago by rmstonecipher@…
Josh,
In r75626 I increased the revision of ports listed by 'port echo depends:poppler' as well as ports installed on my computer which include links to libpoppler.7.dylib.
If additional bugs are caused by links to libpoppler.7.dylib let me know.
Cheers,
Ryan
P.S. If indirect dependents are known to link to libraries which they do not directly depend upon, might it be helpful to explicitly include those libraries in depends_lib (or depends_lib-append) to reduce the need for otool-script-based investigation?
comment:4 Changed 14 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
comment:5 follow-up: 6 Changed 14 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
BTW I didn't think texlive-basic or texlive-latex installed any binaries?
comment:6 Changed 14 years ago by drkp (Dan Ports)
Replying to jmr@…:
BTW I didn't think texlive-basic or texlive-latex installed any binaries?
I came here to point out the same thing. They don't. Not that it's a big deal.
comment:7 Changed 14 years ago by rmstonecipher@…
Dan, Josh,
I did not mean for users to throw extra dinosaur chips in the furnace for naught.
I believe I edited the attached script (used on libpng12 to 14 transition) to correctly identify that those two ports provided files which linked to libpoppler.7.dylib.
Should I be using some additional test to avoid false positives?
Changed 14 years ago by rmstonecipher@…
| Attachment: | library_checker.sh added |
|---|
script to test for libpoppler.7.dylib
comment:8 Changed 14 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
You could check that the files are not in fact links, with e.g. test -L.
Library versions have changed so dependents will need rev bumping.