Re: Please test zfsutils 9.0~svn226163-1
Hello Petr,
On 22.10.2011 08:47, Petr Salinger wrote:
>> But yes, could keep shipping the shared objects as they are. We could
>> embed the libraries into the zfsutils binary package and install them to
>> a private location, say /lib/zfsutils.
>
> It does not have to be a private path,
> i.e. binutils ship they internal libraries as
Well, there isn't much in Debian which /has/ to be done, rather than
things that /should/ be done. Technically you are certainly right - we
could happily bundle the libraries and install them to /lib. That's easy
and works just fine.
> /usr/lib/libbfd-2.20.1-system.20100303.so
> /usr/lib/libopcodes-2.20.1-system.20100303.so
I might be missing something, but "libbfd-2.20.1-system.20100303.so" is
not exactly my understanding of "unversioned". In fact, they include a
date based version in its name which works around the SONAME issue. That
would work for us too.
Of course there are worse examples available as well [1].
Just for the record: I am not even listed as maintainer of zfsutils, so
please feel free to ignore any of my advises I may give here, it's not
my opinion which matters here.
[1] http://lintian.debian.org/tags/shlib-without-versioned-soname.html
(we de-facto take part of this group right now)
--
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
Reply to: