https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813563 --- Comment #10 from Mattia Verga <mattia.verga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #9) > (In reply to Mattia Verga from comment #8) > > I've asked on the packaging mailing list if this is really mandatory... > > there are plenty of private libraries which don't provide their unversioned > > copy in a -devel subpackage and I can't find anything that says so in the > > guidelines. > > The other projects from the same author also don't require this lib at build > > time. > > /me puts on his FPC hat > > I don't think the argument that "it's just a private library used by some > associated projects" counts here, since it's installed into %{_libdir} > directly / publicly, and not into a "private" subdirectory of %{_libdir}. > > How are programs using this library? I assume they are dlopen()ing it, > otherwise not having an unversioned .so or header files doesn't make any > sense to me. This library is loaded in Pascal source code with `librawname='libpasraw.so.1';` and `libraw := LoadLibrary(librawname);`, it's not dinamically linked at build time. Here's an example of the code which needs it: https://github.com/pchev/ccdciel/blob/9ecfac2067ca8546b09ed9641a86309b300e1158/src/u_libraw.pas >From https://github.com/pchev/libpasraw/blob/master/raw/Readme.txt : This library exist because we cannot link a C++ object directly from Pascal. It export C function we can link from Pascal to load a raw buffer and return a pointer to the raw data. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
