On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 11:58:50PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Orton <jorton@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Symbol clashes between libraries /usr/lib/libodbcpsql.so.1.0.0 /usr/lib/libodbcpsql.so.2.0.0: > > Uh ... why are these being compared? Just because they're both there. It is intentional that two different versions of this library are being shipped (and in one package)? Also, regarding: Clashes for /usr/lib/libodbcminiS.so.1.0.0: with /usr/lib/libodbcdrvcfg2S.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/libsapdbS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/liboplodbcS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/libodbctxtS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/liboraodbcS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/libodbcnnS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/libodbcdrvcfg1S.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/libmimerS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/libtdsS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/libodbcpsqlS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/libesoobS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties with /usr/lib/libodbcmyS.so.1.0.0 => ODBCINSTGetProperties is it correct that all these libraries must only ever be used indirectly via libodbc (which will dlopen them) - and no app may link directly against them? If so they can go on the whitelist, but they should not really be in /usr/lib to start with; dlopen-able modules should go in /usr/lib/<somedirectory>. Regards, joe -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
