Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta@xxxxxx 2006-05-06 06:17 EST ------- I agree with your vision wrt. 1) and 2), but I think 3) represents a too FE centric world view which will cause some pain for 3rd party non-FE apps that rightfully (per the spec) assume that they can just dlopen() the module. 1) is not too nice, agreed, but a fourth alternative would be to ship let's say a ctapi-common package which drops a /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ctapi.conf snippet which adds %{_libdir}/ctapi to the linker's load path, as well as include a README in the package that describes the install location and naming conventions for FE CT-API modules. There is also a slight issue wrt. the libctapi-<implementation>.so scheme because in some cases, for example openct and (I guess) towitoko, it would differ from upstream module names. I think we should either stick with upstream naming or create compatibility symlinks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review