On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 02:35:47PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote: > > from which ld.conf did you take this data? My ld.conf (both > > /var/lib/ocaml/ld.conf and /usr/lib/ocaml/ld.conf) don't report any path > > like that. > > I guess you either ran ocaml-ldconf yourself, or had an upgrade for > another package who did it. No, I simply wasn't using the bugged package yet. > > I posted the patch sometimes ago for dh_ocamlld, but seems to me that it > > isn't yet in the ocaml package, I will repost it attached to this mail. > > The reference thread is on this ML, with subject "Summary on > > ocaml-ldconf bug" around date July 08. (The patch is for > > /usr/share/debhelper/autoscripts/postrm-ocamlld). > > Mmm, i applied a patch, but maybe it was lost when my work box crashed. > > I will apply it in a new upload. Ack. > Well, send it to me privately, or better yet, send it to the BTS, and i > will check the changes and apply it by hand. Sure. > > Anyway fixing the bug does not solve the problem for who have currently > > installed packages built with buggy version of dh_ocamlld, so IIRC we > > told about adding a check for spurious path in ld.conf directly in the > > ocaml package, check that we forgot to add. > > Well, maybe or maybe not. How do you propose we do that ? I suppose that > a spurious ppath for you is one that is in /var/lib/ocaml/ld.conf but > not in the associated package. No, a spurious path is an entry in /usr/lib/ocaml/ld.conf (coming from /var/lib/ocaml/ld.conf) that is there only because dh_ocamlld create a package which doesn't remove that path when "upgrading" to a new version but only when "removing" the package. So when you upgrade a library to a version that no longer need entry in /var/lib/ocaml/ld.conf you have a 'spurious' entry. > A better idea would be to fix dh_ocamlld so that it works as planed, and > have it run even if the path entry is empty. It doesn't solve the problem for guys that have currently installed packages created with a buggy version of dh_ocamlld. This is the reason why I propose a ocaml postinst solution. I can't see any other solution (apart from have each library package check to see if old useless entry are still in some ld.conf, but this is a spreading of work instead of centralizing it in a single package). > That said, this would mean performing this check each time we install > this package in the future, which is ok, but eats some uneeded > ressources. Ideally, we could launch this script conditionally if the > version of the installed library package is less than a certain version > (less than the version which first implements this), but i don't know if > that is possible. Is possible but is a lot of work compared to that in a single postinst script in the ocaml package. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli - undergraduate student of CS @ Univ. Bologna, Italy zack@cs.unibo.it | ICQ# 33538863 | http://www.cs.unibo.it/~zacchiro "I know you believe you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!" -- G.Romney
Attachment:
pgp2IzMMxP6C1.pgp
Description: PGP signature