Re: LinuxThreads soname
On 29 Jan 1997, Guy Maor wrote:
> I do agree with Ulrich that it's better to use different directories
> than different sonames. Future cleanliness outweighs present
I didn't really like this approach at first, but the consensus seems
to be going this way.
> Prompted by Ulrich's suggestion of new versions of ld-linux and
> additional fields in ld.so.conf, I've thought of a solution:
> Lines in /etc/ld.so.conf will have a second, optional, field - a
> version number of ld-linux.so. ld-linux will look in directories that
> match its version number before looking in directories that don't have
> a version number. It will never look in directories with an unmatched
> version number. A new version of ld-linux is released with
> ld-linux.so.2 for libc6 and ld-linux.so.1 for libc5.
> New versions of libc5 linked libraries are released. The libraries
> are installed into the /lib/elf, /usr/lib/elf, etc. The libraries all
> have to depend on a version of ld-linux that supports the above
> scheme. In the preinst, they will all check that their install
> directory exists in /etc/ld.so.conf with the appropriate version, 1.
> If not, they add it.
> This scheme will work for future versions of libc as long as we always
> upgrade the major version of ld-linux along with libc.
This, or something like it, sounds feasible. I'll need to give it
some more thought though to work out the details. One potentially
tricky thing will be how to specify the dynamic linker version in
> Also, David suggested appending the `elf' to the directories. It
> might be better to append `libc5'.
I didn't suggest 'elf'. I merely used it as the example of how we did
this type of thing when there was an ELF libc4.
David Engel ODS Networks
email@example.com 1001 E. Arapaho Road
(972) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com