Hi,
rpm generates provides from sonames of ELF shared objects. If a shared object
doens't have any soname then the provide is created from name of file. rpm
generates provides only from ELF shared objects it doesn't generate provides
from symlinks to shared objects. Yes, it generates provides from hard links to
shared ojbects because of obvious reason.
Difference between rpm-4.8.0 (rhel-6.7) and rpm-4.11.3 (rhel-7.2) is that the
newer rpm requires soname to start with prefix "lib" otherwise from this soname
no provides is created. If a file doesn't have soname and a provide is created
from name of the file then the file name must start with "lib" prefix too.
This doesn't explain completely what you observed and I tested this and I got
a bit different results but nevertheless you have to follow common practices
for creating shared libraries (as was already written here) and rename your
library to match expected format of name for shared library i. e. library
name should start with lib also you should link a library to some program
using name from a generated provide then rpm will create a matching require and
dependency checking will work.
Lubos
rpm generates provides from sonames of ELF shared objects. If a shared object
doens't have any soname then the provide is created from name of file. rpm
generates provides only from ELF shared objects it doesn't generate provides
from symlinks to shared objects. Yes, it generates provides from hard links to
shared ojbects because of obvious reason.
Difference between rpm-4.8.0 (rhel-6.7) and rpm-4.11.3 (rhel-7.2) is that the
newer rpm requires soname to start with prefix "lib" otherwise from this soname
no provides is created. If a file doesn't have soname and a provide is created
from name of the file then the file name must start with "lib" prefix too.
This doesn't explain completely what you observed and I tested this and I got
a bit different results but nevertheless you have to follow common practices
for creating shared libraries (as was already written here) and rename your
library to match expected format of name for shared library i. e. library
name should start with lib also you should link a library to some program
using name from a generated provide then rpm will create a matching require and
dependency checking will work.
Lubos
From: "david kerns" <david.t.kerns@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "General discussion about the RPM package manager" <rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 12:48:13 AM
Subject: Re: error: Failed dependenciesOn Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Tim Mooney <Tim.Mooney@xxxxxxxx> wrote:In regard to: error: Failed dependencies, david kerns said (at 2:44pm on...:
Just joined the mail-list and found an (unresolved) existing thread with my
exact issue. I'm hoping this get's linked to the existing thread... (last
response Tue, Sep 1, 2015)
# rpm -i mypackage.x86_64.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
libtestlib.so()(64bit) is needed by mypackage.x86_64.rpm
# rpm -qlp --provides mypackage.x86_64.rpm
testlib.so()(64bit)
/opt/mypackage/lib/testlib.so
/opt/mypackage/lib/libtestlib.so
This is just a guess, but it looks like the shared library you're creating
either doesn't have a SONAME or the SONAME doesn't match the actual file
name.
You should probably read up on best practices for creating a shared
library on your platform (Linux, I presume, though you don't provide
any details about your OS, distribution, version, or RPM version, all of
which would be useful to include).ah yes, sorry:CentOS release 6.7 (Final)
RPM version 4.8.0This may end the conversation ... (but if there's a fix available on CentOS 6.7, ... we'll be there for a while)I just tried the exact thing on:CentOS Linux release 7.2.1511 (Core)
RPM version 4.11.3and the rpm works without issue. Ugh!
Note: libtestlib.so is a symbolic link to testlib.so
If I make a hard link instead of a symbolic link (during the build
process), the rpm install works fine
That seems to confirm that it's an issue with the SONAME. Read up
on shared libraries on Linux and the SONAME.
thanks ...I tried adding (one at a time) both SONAME libtestlib.so and testlib.so ... both fail with the listed SONAME$ objdump -p BUILDROOT/mypackage-1.0-0.1.x86_64/tmp/mypackage/lib/libtestlib.so | grep SONAME
SONAME testlib.so
$ rpm -qlp --provides RPMS/x86_64/mypackage-1.0-0.1.x86_64.rpm
testlib.so()(64bit)
mypackage = 1.0-0.1
mypackage(x86-64) = 1.0-0.1
/tmp/mypackage
/tmp/mypackage/bin
/tmp/mypackage/bin/main
/tmp/mypackage/lib
/tmp/mypackage/lib/libtestlib.so
/tmp/mypackage/lib/testlib.so
/tmp/mypackage/src
$ objdump -p BUILDROOT/mypackage-1.0-0.1.x86_64/tmp/mypackage/lib/libtestlib.so | grep SONAME
SONAME libtestlib.so
$ rpm -qlp --provides RPMS/x86_64/mypackage-1.0-0.1.x86_64.rpm
libtestlib.so()(64bit)
mypackage = 1.0-0.1
mypackage(x86-64) = 1.0-0.1
/tmp/mypackage
/tmp/mypackage/bin
/tmp/mypackage/bin/main
/tmp/mypackage/lib
/tmp/mypackage/lib/libtestlib.so
/tmp/mypackage/lib/testlib.so
/tmp/mypackage/srcPS: if this is a package you will eventually distribute to customers,
it's even more important that you follow more of the Linux conventions
for shared libraries.
Tim
--
Tim Mooney Tim.Mooney@xxxxxxxx
Enterprise Computing & Infrastructure 701-231-1076 (Voice)
Room 242-J6, Quentin Burdick Building 701-231-8541 (Fax)
North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105-5164Per Jay Hendron's suggestion:
Maybe a silly suggestion, but could you add a "Provides: libtestlib.so()(64bit)" tag to your spec file and rebuild?Which ever (or both) one I list as for "Provides:" adds another depends in the "rpm -qlp" output.
So, it does seem like a bug, but already fixed by 4.11.3_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
_______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
