On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: >> Again, I'm very hesitant to use rpm triggers, but at this point >> nothing is ruled out yet. I'm open to suggestions. > >I vote for using /etc/ld.so.conf.d infraestructure introduced by Jakub >in glibc-2.3.3-18. > >We can simply add an entry for /usr/X11R6/lib inside >/etc/ld.so.conf.d/xorg-x11 (for example). This way, even if deinstalling >XFree86 removes /usr/X11R/lib from /etc/ld.so.conf, the entry will still >exist inside /etc/ld.so.conf.d/xorg-x11. The trigger scripts are already in place in CVS, and will be in a future build. The ld.so.conf.d stuff is a promising solution for the future, but I'm not ready to switch to it yet for a few reasons: - It's brand new, and to the best of my knowledge it hasn't been widely tested yet. I'd rather wait until it is known to not have any nasties in it, especially for something as important as X11 installation. - The trigger scripts that are present now should work just fine for the immediate need we have. - Using the ld.so.conf.d approach makes the packages Fedora Core 2 specific, meaning the xorg-x11 packaging is more difficult to try to get working on FC1 or older OS releases should someone (myself included) want to use xorg-x11 on an older release in an unsupported fashion. Once I decide to throw away package compatibility for FC1 and older OS releases however, I will switch to the new mechanism, as it will likely be well used by then, and any glaring surprises that pop up should be long since fixed likely. TTYL -- Mike A. Harris ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris OS Systems Engineer - X.org X11 maintainer - Red Hat
