On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 2:05 PM, David C. Rankin < drankinatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Thank you for your help. I solved the libssl issue by installing > libssl-compatibility from AUR. However -- that brought to light another > problem > brought on by recent updates that moved libssl.so.25 to libssl.so.26. I've > checked AUR and there isn't a compatibility package. The error received > from the > createrepo app was: > > [12:57 nirvana:/usr/lib] # createrepo -h > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/usr/share/createrepo/genpkgmetadata.py", line 26, in <module> > import rpm > File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/rpm/__init__.py", line 7, in > <module> > from _rpm import * > ImportError: libkrb5.so.25: cannot open shared object file: No such file or > directory > > Crossing my fingers that the libraries would be backwards compatible > for the > purposes of 'createrepo', I just did: > > ln -s libkrb5.so.26 libkrb5.so.25 > > which did work with createrepo, but this feels like a cluge. In this > situation, > what is the proper solution? 'createrepo' is a python package (python is a > snake > to me), so do we grep on libkrb5.so.25 and change to 26? Do we issue a > report or > request for some type of compatibility package for libkrb5? Or did we just > develop a compatibility package with the symlink? Symlinking so's is unadvisable as it's bound to get you in trouble sooner or later -- clearly in your case it's sooner. The only reason I can think of to install a compatibility package is one of two reasons: 1) The package is a closed source binary and you're waiting for upstream to rebuild it for you. 2) The package won't build against the new .so and you're waiting for a patch from upstream. Is one of these stopping you from rebuilding the package rather than applying all manner of bandaids? d
