[Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]