On Jul 20, Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> wrote: > > And this means that perl (a libcrypt dependency) would be broken between > > 1 and 5 (or maybe 1 and 3): is this ever going to work? > > Given that this new package is going to replace a part of glibc, it > will need to behave as if it was part of the pseudo-Essential package > set. When it comes to the diversion that means it needs to be added > *without* the rename, so that we always have the libcrypt.so.1 present. I am not sure about how this would work: can you point me to an example package? > But otherwise why would it be broken? Because indeed when using dpkg-divert --rename the file would be missing for some time. > > But even if this worked correctly, glibc installs a libcrypt-N.NN.so, > > whose exact name I expect changes among different releases. > This one is tied to the major.minor glibc version, so I think you > should just ignore it. I'd expect at most glibc itself to perhaps rely > on it, anything else using it would not be very sane IMO. I just feared ldconfig deciding to change the .so.1 symlink, I could not find any documentation about when it decides to change existing symlinks and then how it chooses between different versions of the same library. -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature