Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Binary chrome - is it safe in terms of dependencies?

[Nilesh Govindrajan <me@nileshgr.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1674 bytes --]

Well, many times you can't really anticipate everything.

I had my libreoffice-bin pdf import broken for two months because some
shared library had got upgraded against which it wasn't linked.

(excuse for top post, typing from mobile)

--
Nilesh Govindrajan
http://nileshgr.com
On Jan 31, 2013 5:38 PM, "Nuno Silva" <nunojsilva@ist.utl.pt> wrote:

> On 2013-01-31, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Yohan Pereira
> >> <yohan.pereira@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On 30/01/13 at 11:09pm, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
> >>>> Since Gentoo updates libraries very quickly, I'm wondering if it is
> >>>> safe to use the binary version? Has anyone faced library breakages on
> >>>> this?
> >>>>
> >>>> Chromium is easily recompiled with new libraries and you don't have a
> >>>> broken browser, which won't really be the case with the binary
> >>>> version.
> >>>
> >>> I've used the binary version (google-chrome) for a while and never
> >>> had any breakages. I guess if there's a library update that could
> >>> potentially break google-chrome the gentoo devs would add a blocker so
> >>> you wont be able to install the 2 at the same time.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Or I can just bundle a copy of the necessary libraries, similar to
> >> what I have done for libudev.so.0.
> >>
> >
> > Sounds good. I guess I'll switch to binary chrome then.
>
> Also, I suppose that, if there were library incompatibilities, the
> package would never go stable, or would at least, like Yohan said, lead
> to a block/version dependency.
>
> --
> Nuno Silva (aka njsg)
> http://njsg.sdf-eu.org/
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2501 bytes --]