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

Re: proposal: treat plugins and shared libraries differently



David Benson <daveb@idealab.com> wrote:
> PROPOSAL:
> 	Shared libraries and "plugins" should be
> 	distinguished (and defined) explicitly by policy.
> 
> 	The intent is that policy section 4.3 will
> 	no longer apply to plugins, just shared libraries.
> 
> PROPOSED CHANGE:
> 
> 	I propose prepending text like the following to 
> 	section 4.3.
> 
> 	
>      Shared libraries are .so files containing compiled
>      code that are loaded by the ld.so(5) library.
>      They must always be installed in the directories listed
>      in ld.so.conf.  (Applications may also have private .so files,
>      often called `plugins', which are stored `/usr/lib/program_name';
>      they are exempt from all the rules in this section, except that they
>      must not be installed executable).
> 
> 
> EXPLANATION:
> 	
> 	- The change is largely a clarification, since
> 	  the original text didn't define which files
> 	  exactly were shared-libraries.
> 
> 	- There are many packages which could use this change
> 	  (some cited in bug #42399, which is also against lintian
> 	  about this problem):
> 	  mozilla, netscape, nessusd, quake-glide-libs,
> 	  gql.  Not sure exactly how many in total.
> 
> 	- The considerations in section 4.3 largely pertain
> 	  to smoothly updating the shared-libraries
> 	  given the behavior of ld.so and ldconfig,
> 	  which are not used for plugins.

Seconded. Shouldn't this have a bug number?

-- 
Don't worry  --  shop.

Attachment: pgpmU_QGhqP_B.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: