Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 17:50:27 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> To: Will Andrews <will@csociety.org> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Bug in pkg_add? Message-ID: <3D47F933.31C553E8@FreeBSD.org> References: <xzpr8hk41jr.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <3D47D344.8E23AECF@FreeBSD.org> <20020731130208.GH52296@squall.waterspout.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[discussion redirected to ports@, where it belongs] Will Andrews wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 03:08:36PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > This is the result of old aout->elf hacks still present in > > bsd.ports.mk. Just define NO_FILTER_SHLIBS=yes and you should be set. > > BTW, the better solution is to hack port to not install > > libsectok.so.3.1, which is incorrect name for elf shared library > > anyway. > > Such things are usually symlinks, not the actual shared library, > and are occasionally used for configure scripts to detect the > version installed (a valid usage IMHO). You are not quite correct. Shared libraries with embedded version number look like libfoo-X.Y.so.Z, format libfoo.so.X.Y is relict from the aout days and doesn't have any other meaningful purpose today. > I would like to do away with the silly hack to rename these files > in bsd.port.mk, because they don't actually affect operation and > quite occasionally result in broken +CONTENTS for no reason. I > encountered the same problem DES found and it took me awhile > before I could figure out exactly where things were getting changed. > > Removing symlinks for no reason breaks FreeBSD's compatibility > with the rest of the world, which installs them. I strongly disagree. Shared libraries in FreeBSD should be named libfoo.so.X, or at least libfoo-X.Y.so.Z, all other ways should be discouraged and threated as broken, no matter whether the library was installed as a part of the base system or as a part of a port. This contributes to overall OS consistency, which always was a strong selling point of FreeBSD as compared to Linux (for example) and according to my practice usually doesn't create any significant additional overhead or any compatibility problems "with the rest of the world". However, I do agree with you that probably it is a good time to say good bye to old aout hacks in bsd.port.mk, as old aout systems are unikely are able to use today's bsd.port.mk and many important ports in the tree anyway. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D47F933.31C553E8>