https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097584 --- Comment #3 from Igor Gnatenko <i.gnatenko.brain@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Martin Gieseking from comment #2) > > shiny.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libshiny.so libshiny.so > > If libshiny is supposed to be linked dynamically (and not just accessed via > dlopen), it should get a proper soname reflecting the ABI version, e.g. > something like libshiny.so.1. As long as future versions of the library > don't change the interface, the soversion should be constant while the > version of the package may increase, of course. I suggest to ask the > upstream developer whether he/she can add support for building the shared > library including a reliable ABI versioning. > > Since there is no proper shlib support yet, you can also package the static > library. I've sent bugreport[0] to upstream. I'm packaging this because stuntrally using bundled shiny. It just compiling shiny and linking with it. Probably you can help me write correctly patch for providing shared libraries ? [0]https://github.com/scrawl/shiny/issues/20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review