Bug#384424: lintian: possible mishandling of similarily-named shlibs with dashes
Martin-Éric Racine <q-funk@iki.fi> writes:
> Package: lintian
> Version: 1.23.23
> Severity: normal
> I have been getting this error on my package for a long time:
> E: planner binary: duplicate-entry-in-shlibs-control-file libmrp
> /usr/lib/planner/
> |-- file-modules
> | |-- libmrp-xml.so
> | `-- libmrp-xsl.so
[...]
> Based on this, I'm wondering if the error might actually be caused by
> Lintian's inability to process SO libraries with a dash in the filename
> and a similar first half in the filename?
This error isn't about the files stored in your package; rather, it's
about the shlibs control file in your package. The contents of the file
are:
libplanner-1 0 planner
libmrp xml planner
libmrp xsl planner
libhtml plugin planner
libmsp plugin planner
libpython plugin planner
libsql plugin planner
libxmlplanner plugin planner
libstorage-mrproject 1 planner
libstorage sql planner
which certainly does look broken. Since those binaries are in a
subdirectory of /usr/lib and are not public libraries or (apparently) used
outside this package, it seems to me that they shouldn't be listed in the
shlibs file of the package at all. Anyway, per Policy 8.6.3, that shlibs
file is really not in a valid format; the second field is supposed to be
the SONAME version number. And it does indeed contain a duplicate entry.
Policy isn't particularly clear on the requirements for the shlibs file
for plugins that are only used internally by that package, but my
understanding is that there's no reason to list them. I'd be inclined to
add -X options to dh_makeshlibs (which there should be some mechanism to
do via CDBS) to ignore those plugin directories, or possibly even argue
that CDBS should be doing this automatically.
I'd be curious to hear other opinions on this, though. I may be missing
something.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: