[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Are libtool .la files in non-dev library packages bugs?

#include <hallo.h>
* Marcelo E. Magallon [Tue, Aug 20 2002, 04:19:02PM]:

>  > Yes, and this breaks the whole idea of SONAMES. I wonder how such shit
>  > has ever been allowed to enter Debian.
>  Are we still talking about plug-ins here?  I had that impression.
>  Say, how is a SONAME useful for a plugin?  A plug-in is not something

Do we? Plugins do not need soname, but then they should be keeped
outside of ld.so search paths.

>  you link directly into a program (that's the whole point of it), so it
>  has no bussiness living in any directory that the dynamic linker

Exactly. A program should know how the plugin name called and it should
manage the binary compatibility in their own ways. Why does a plugin
solution need an additional magic file to resolve the plugin, stored in
between other, SONAMEd libs?

>  searches.  For the purposes of a plug-in, a namespace is as good a
>  soname.  If you desing your plug-in system in any sensible way, the
>  user tells you "open foo" and your program will go looking for
>  /usr/lib/bar/plugin-foo.so or whatever naming scheme makes you happy.
>  The point is, you'll have your very own area where you can set up your
>  very own mess.

Exactly. Get rid of .la files, their usage to resolve path names is a
nasty kludge.

-!- Gromitt_ is now known as Gromitt
<@Getty> oh scheisse, gromitt wird wach
<@Getty> da hab ich jetzt soviele lines gemacht in den letzten 24 std.
<@Getty> und jetzt kommt der wieder ;)
                                        -- #debian.de

Reply to: