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

Bug#623484: dpkg-cross doesn't detect libs not directly under /usr/lib



+++ Andre Kostur [2011-04-20 10:02 -0700]:
> Package: dpkg-cross
> Version: 2.5.8
> Severity: normal
> 
> Certain packages have libraries that exist in a subdirectory under /usr/lib.
> dpkg-cross fails to detect these as valid libs to include.  A specific example
> is libaxis2c0_1.6.0-1_amd64.deb.   I'm trying to repackage this for use on
> an i686 machine.  This package supplies a set of shared
> objects under /usr/lib/axis2/lib.  However, running dpkg-cross against this
> package results in "package libaxis2c0 doesn't provide any useful files.
> Skipping."
> 
> Perhaps dpkg-cross should either be able to find libraries in subdirectories
> of /usr/lib, or the user could supply additional paths to look for libs?

dpkg-cross deliberately ignores everything in subdirs under /usr/lib
unless it is known to be necessary for cross-compiling. Are the shared
objects in /usr/lib/axis2/lib necessary for cross building? There is
not some top-level library that external packages should be linking
against which loads those libs? (This latter is the assumption
dpkg-cross's current behaviour rests on - exceptions would have to
justify themselves).

The difficulty of just allowing it to convert anything that looks like
a library in /usr/lib/*/ is that that makes an enormous number of
packages which we could previously ignore have -cross versions. And
almost all of them _are_ useless.

We could have a specific exception list of packages/dirs that should
be converted, but we've been trying to avoid that.

Still if those files really _are_ needed then we have to find a way to
make it work, by moving them, or deciding that dpkg-cross _should_
deal with them (or waiting for multiarch-cross functionality to make
dpkg-cross's conversion behaviour irrelevant - how much of a hurry are
you in?)

Wookey
-- 
Principal hats:  Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM
http://wookware.org/



Reply to: