From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 24 07:34:42 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4547816A41C for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 07:34:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bsam@bsam.ru) Received: from bsam.ru (gw.ipt.ru [80.253.10.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8A343D48 for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 07:34:40 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bsam@bsam.ru) Received: from bsam by bsam.ru with local (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1DaTwh-000EVp-Qy; Tue, 24 May 2005 11:35:23 +0400 To: Kris Kennaway References: <86690406@srv.sem.ipt.ru> <20050523233952.GA80556@xor.obsecurity.org> <77732620@srv.sem.ipt.ru> From: Boris Samorodov Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 11:35:23 +0400 In-Reply-To: <77732620@srv.sem.ipt.ru> (Boris Samorodov's message of "Tue, 24 May 2005 08:48:19 +0400") Message-ID: <11652596@srv.sem.ipt.ru> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: "Boris B. Samorodov" Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: make generate-plist and lib.so.X.Y.Z X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 07:34:42 -0000 On Tue, 24 May 2005 08:48:19 +0400 Boris Samorodov wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:39:53 -0700 Kris Kennaway wrote: > > On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 02:37:29AM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote: > > > $ cat work/.PLIST.mktmp=20 > > > test/libtest.so.1.2.3 > > > test/libtest.so.1 > Shouldn't this be "test/libtest.so.1.2"? > > > test/libtest.so.1 > > > test/libtest.so > > > ----- > > >=20 > > > If it's a feature, then where I can get an info on it? Or is it a bug? > > What are you asking about, exactly? > > Kris To be more strict. The developers-handbook/policies-shlib.html says: ----- Note: ld.so will always use the highest =E2=80=9Cminor=E2=80=9D revision. F= or instance, it will use libc.so.2.2 in preference to libc.so.2.0, even if the program was initially linked with libc.so.2.0. In addition, our ELF dynamic linker does not handle minor version numbers at all. However, one should still specify a major and minor version number as our Makefiles =E2=80=9Cdo the right thing=E2=80=9D based = on the type of system. ----- It is about linking process. Nothing said about installation. But at ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk at the generate-plist: label we have: ----- .if (${PORTOBJFORMAT} =3D=3D "aout") @${SED} -e 's,\(/lib.*\.so\.[0-9]*\)$$,\1.0,' ${TMPPLIST} > ${TMPPL= IST}. tmp .else @${SED} -e 's,\(/lib.*\.so\.[0-9]*\)\.[0-9]*$$,\1,' ${TMPPLIST} > $= {TMPP LIST}.tmp .endif ----- Isn't it preventing shlib.{major}.{minor} to be registered as installed one? --=20 bsam