Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
Library Name Conflicts
* Put the library in a subdirectory of /usr/lib or /lib and
include a ld.so.conf file in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/.
Erm, that may make rpm happy, but will confuse the hell out of ld.so, which is
not a good idea. Especially since the newer / odder library which uses this
hack will be found first. Instead when a new lib gets added with a conflicting
soname, then the packager should change the soname. Since we have no packages
uses it (yet) this shouldn't break any existing packages. Yes this will require
patches for packages which want to build against this, but its better then
confusing ld.so
Example. currently we have an xmlrpc-c package in FE which provides
/usr/lib[64]/libxmplrpc.so.0
But we also have xmlrpc-efi under review, which also provides
/usr/lib[64]/libxmplrpc.so.0
Both with normal sonames, iow both with sonames == filename, now if we would
fix that by putting the one of xmlrpc-efi in a subdir under /usr/lib[64], and
add a ld.so.conf file. Then user who install both will have there xmlrpc-c
uisng apps go kaplowey, as they will get linked against the xmlrpc-efi one, as
that is in ld.so.conf and ld.so.conf listed dirs are searched before the
default lib dirs.
Thus I've requested the xmlrpc-efi submitter to rename the lib too:
/usr/lib[64]/libxmplrpc-efi.so.0
And adjust the soname accordingly.
Regards,
Hans
--
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
