Bug#964073: lintian: Possible false positives for breakout-link for Lua modules
Hi Felix,
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 2:22 AM Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Sergei,
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 1:33 AM Sergei Golovan <sgolovan@nes.ru> wrote:
> >
> > Though, the link never goes outside /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu,
> > so I would say that this warning is spurious.
>
> I am not sure who is right, but the warning is not spurious from the
> perspective of the original requestor. Bug#243158 cited a scenario
> very much like yours as the reason for why the dynamic linker was
> confused.
As far as I can see, it's a link like /usr/lib/foo.so.1.0.0 ->
/usr/lib/somewhere/foo.so.1.0.0
was the concern for bug #243158. Here, Lintian emits a warning for the
link which
points backward (/usr/lib/<triplet> have the real file,
/usr/lib/<triplet>/lua have the link).
>
> Those links also never left /usr/lib.
The explanation for breakout-link says that there might be an issue
with multi-arch
(link may point to another architecture), so I'd just check and
wouldn'd show the warning
if both the link and the target are located inside one /usr/lib/<triplet>.
>
> Like so many bugs in Debian, however, the feature was requested 17
> years ago. At that point, Lua had already been around for ten years
> (having arrived in 1993). Do you know when Lua adopted the current
> shared object hierarchy and resolution method?
I don't know when this layout was introduced in individual packages, I
can see that
it was implemented in dh-lua in 2012.
Cheers!
--
Sergei Golovan
Reply to: