"Michael Schwendt wrote:" > > On Thu, 7 Nov 2013 10:13:24 -0800 (PST), David Highley wrote: > > > "Ralf Corsepius wrote:" > > > > > > On 11/07/2013 04:36 AM, David Highley wrote: > > > > We have noticed a growing trend of the final symbolic link not being > > > > established for libraries. > > > Could you provide an example? > > > > > > To me, your description sounds like as if you have encountered packaging > > > bugs in some packages. > > > > Then there are several; X11, libxml2, libxslt, and others. Its not a > > simple script to try and identify all the ones missing as there are no > > hard and fast naming rules for libraries so that you could easily parse > > the real library and then check for symlink. > > Sounds a bit as if you're missing the *-devel packages for those libs. > libX11-devel libxml2-devel and so on. Ah, now we see the subtlety in the split between development and run time packages. It had not dawned on us that the final symlink is tied to the development package, especially as their are other symlinks being applied. > -- > packaging mailing list > packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging > -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
