Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 05:38:57 +1200 From: Joe Abley <jabley@clear.co.nz> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ELF ldconfig Message-ID: <19980920053857.A1034@clear.co.nz> In-Reply-To: <19980920042741.A6144@clear.co.nz>; from Joe Abley on Sun, Sep 20, 1998 at 04:27:41AM %2B1200 References: <19980920042741.A6144@clear.co.nz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Sep 20, 1998 at 04:27:41AM +1200, Joe Abley wrote: > > Might I suggest that elfhints.c could be extended to recognise other > names of the correct type in the search path which don't conform to the > ^lib[a-z]+\.so\.[0-9]$ pattern? Would this have an adverse impact on > anything else? > > If this is the way to go, then I'm happy to suggest a patch - I'm just > hoping that I'm all wrong about this, and that there is something very basic > and simple that would be better :) The patch required is pretty small... This is on the (pretty recent, I think) sbin/ldconfig/elfhints.c tagged $Id: elfhints.c,v 1.1 1998/09/05 03:30:54 jdp Exp $ and basically just extends the scope of an ELF library's version number to include the "." character, tidying up afterwards so that the check for ".so." in the middle of the library name still works: 102c102 < while (vers > dp->d_name && isdigit(*(vers-1))) --- > while (vers > dp->d_name && (isdigit(*(vers-1)) || *(vers-1) == '.')) 103a104 > vers++; /* don't include the last "." */ Is there a good reason why (for example) ldconfig -r | grep -e '-lslang\.1\.1\.2' _should_ fail under ELF, assuming that in this example it is necessary to look for precisely version 1.1.2 of the so and no others? Joe -- Joe Abley <jabley@clear.co.nz> Tel +64 9 912-4065, Fax +64 9 912-5008 Network Architect, CLEAR Net http://www.clear.net.nz/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980920053857.A1034>