On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 09:36 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > Rex Dieter (rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > >> Doesn't ldconfig also update ld.so.cache? If so, won't "bad things" > >> happen if that cache is stale, like when/if 2 pkgs are installed in a > >> transaction, and pkg #2 depends on shlibs from pkg #1? > > > > If the cache is stale, it will look in the directories for something that > > doesn't exist in the cache. I'm trying to think of a way the cache could > > point to the wrong *version* of the library, but nothing is coming to > > mind. > > pkg #1 upgrade: old version includes libfoo.so.1, new version includes > libfoo.so.2 > pkg #2: scriptlet requires something from pkg #1, which uses libfoo.so.2 > bang. how would that break? an update is an install then an erase. so we install libfoo which drops in libfoo.so.2 and the symlinks it needs If the scriptlets have a special preun req then they need to have it listed. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
