Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 11:09:37AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 06:29:25PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > But folding it into shlibdeps at least would remove all those warnings
> > > that were created by shlibdeps.
> > What warnings were created by shlibdeps? I'm not sure what you're
> > referring to here.
> Sorry. I had a short look at some packages and all redundant
> dependencies were created by shlibdeps. It doesn't seem to make sense to
> have a list by maintainer when the dependencies weren't added by
> him/her. Or did I misunderstand what this discussion is about?
Yes, I'm afraid you did. The behavior of dpkg-shlibdeps is correct: it
documents the packages that must be present on the system in order for the
binaries to work. The bug we're discussing happens at the ELF linker level
-- you can't have dpkg-shlibdeps decide to ignore some of these libs,
because the *binary* still embeds references to them and if they're missing,
the binary will not work.
So the fix is to get our binaries to stop embedding references to libraries
they don't need, then dpkg-shlibdeps will do the right thing automatically.
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: