Re: Field3D abipkgdiff significant?

[Richard Shaw]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 3:12 PM Jerry James <loganjerry(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 10:53 AM Richard Shaw
> <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  > So Field3D had a patch release a while ago and I build the package for
>  Rawhide but haven't decided to build for F31+ because I can't tell if the
>  abi changes are significant or not and I don't want to rebuild all the
>  dependencies.
>  >
>  > Can someone let me know if this is safe?
>
>  Adding functions and variables is okay.  The only concern is the 8
>  changed variables.  If they are not referenced by any consumers of
>  Field3D, then updating is okay.  I get the impression that those are
>  internal variables (because they are static and have a version number
>  in their names).  If you can confirm that these variables are not
>  referenced directly by any Field3D consumers, then go ahead and build
>  the update.  Otherwise, you will need to rebuild all consumers to be
>  sure the update doesn't cause breakage.
>  
That doesn't sound like a lot of fun, so seeing as OpenImageIO is the only
consumer on Fedora, perhaps I should just rebuild it anyway to be safe :)

$ sudo dnf repoquery --srpm --whatrequires "libField3D.so.1.7()(64bit)"
enabling rawhide-modular-source repository
enabling rawhide-source repository
Fedora - Modular Rawhide - Source
          125 kB/s | 175 kB     00:01
Fedora - Rawhide - Source
          3.2 MB/s | 6.7 MB     00:02
Field3D-0:1.7.3-1.fc33.src
OpenImageIO-0:2.1.13.0-2.fc33.src

Thanks,
Richard