Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies
- To: Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org>
- Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies
- From: Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>
- Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 11:06:51 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 87fyuvndn8.fsf@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>
- In-reply-to: <1120151265.4813.2.camel@mirchusko.localnet> (Josselin Mouette's message of "Thu, 30 Jun 2005 19:07:45 +0200")
- References: <20050624152151.GQ19190@seventeen> <1119959167.13025.49.camel@silicium.ccc.cea.fr> <20050628125152.GN19190@seventeen> <1119967555.22475.9.camel@silicium.ccc.cea.fr> <1119974892.22475.39.camel@silicium.ccc.cea.fr> <42C19B89.6080600@derobert.net> <1120044682.25980.6.camel@silicium.ccc.cea.fr> <1120147932.7272.89.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1120151265.4813.2.camel@mirchusko.localnet>
Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> writes:
> Le jeudi 30 juin 2005 à 13:12 -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva a écrit :
>> Why not simply puting the loader inside the library package? If the
>> loader should always be together with the library, then make them one
>> package and be done with it.
>>
>> I may be missing something obvious, but I don't see the point of having
>> a -commong package in this case.
>
> If the library SONAME changes, the loader's filename doesn't need to
> change. However, in this case, the two versions of the library must be
> able to be installed together, so the loader has to be in a different
> package.
The loaders are plugins, right? (they get dlopened and not exec()ed)
And then you mix two SONAMEs of a library in a single program? I doubt
you get that to work reliable.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: