Re: Bug#350468: libpcre3: install libpcre.so* in /lib
On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 11:48:52AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 07:25:25PM +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar <email@example.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 07:11:59PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > >On 2006-01-29 Bart Martens <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > >>Package: libpcre3
> > >>Version: 6.4-1.1
> > >>Severity: wishlist
> > >
> > >>It would be nice to see libpcre.so* installed in /lib so that the -P
> > >>option in grep can be enabled. See also bugs #238237, #237071, #338401,
> > >>#338500, (...?). According to these webpages, redhat installs
> > >>libpcre.so* in /lib since 2001, for the very same reason :
> > >>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41104
> > >>http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/fedora/3/i386/pcre-4.5-3.i386.html
> > >[...]
> > >
> > >(SID)ametzler@argenau:~$ apt-cache show grep libpcre3 | \
> > > egrep '^Pack|^Prio|^Ess'
> > >Package: grep
> > >Essential: yes
> > >Priority: required
> > >Package: libpcre3
> > >Priority: standard
> > >
> > >If standard grep linked against libpcre, libpcre's priority would nee
> > >to be bumped and it would become quasi-essential.
> > >
> > >This would require at least discussion on debian-devel.
> > > cu andreas
> > Mark,
> > The grep maintainers would like to enable the -P grep option.
> > Please move libpcre.so* to /lib.
> Instead of moving libpcre and making it quasi-essential, why not
> slightly modify grep so that it can dlopen libpcre if present. Not
> everyone needs the -P option to grep. But then, there is the problem of
> scripts that would use the -P option when libpcre is not present :-/
Those scripts would either be system-specific (in which case the local
sysadmin would ensure that libpcre is installed), or be part of a
package, that then needs to declare a proper dependency. I don't think
there is a problem here.
Fun will now commence
-- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4