Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 17:16:42 +0100 From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> To: kientzle@acm.org Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ldconfig / dynamic linker hints library name conventions Message-ID: <200312101716.46518.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <3FD65D51.7090609@acm.org> References: <200312071603.29573.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> <3FD65D51.7090609@acm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Wednesday 10 December 2003 00:40, Tim Kientzle wrote: > Michael Nottebrock wrote: > > From the ldconfig manpage: > > > > "Filenames must conform to the lib*.so.[0-9] pattern in order to > > be added to the hints file." > > > > I wonder if there actually are any compelling reasons to keep this > > behaviour - > > Yes there are. Not all shared libraries are meant to be seen > by ldconfig. This isn't very convincing. The reality looks much more like this: Many software packages out there assume ldconfig and workalikes to be as liberal with regards to shared library filenames as linux' ldconfig (or NetBSD's ld.elf_so) and install libraries named lib*.so.[0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+. If libtool weren't as widely used as it is for building shared libraries, this would make for a bigger problem than it is now. Packages that actually do install shared libraries which are exclusively dlloaded usually put those in a location where they won't be picked up by ldconfig, like a subdirectory in PREFIX/lib. -- ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQA/10buXhc68WspdLARAomEAJ9hSkYEJd2Jc57u7gpFxzKUsXjw5QCfeTvA yM7a1tpLW2KF4AgV9T/jv3Q= =eEGV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200312101716.46518.michaelnottebrock>