On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 03:18:06PM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 11:39:41AM +0300, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > ldconfig has -X option which disables the symlink modifications, so > > > I'd like to propose adding the option to recommended %post (and > > > possibly also %postun) scriptlet to avoid such surprises. > > > > > > Comments? > > > > What would create the symlinks, if ldconfig -X is used everywhere? > > rpm should do that as symlinks are packaged. If applications suddenly fail > to start we know there is a packaging bug. Ideally ldconfig wouldn't > touch packaged libraries at all and just update ld.so.cache. Yes, that makes a lot of sense. But I guess there will be quite a few packages that will break, so maybe this is a feature for F13? > Adding -X only to packages that need it won't help much though. I > didn't realize that to avoid the unexpected symlink modifications all > packages would have to use -X because in a transaction all %post > scripts are executed before old files are removed. It would probably need to be mass-edited. Most ldconfig calls have a typical scheme as a shell replacement, so one could catch a lot automatically. At the very least it would allow to identify and bugzilla packages that have ldconfig uses in non-typical ways. I just wonder if there are implicit uses of ldconfig in other tools used during install time we might be missing. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpXNi3Aglx6m.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
