Re: Bug#519941: 10.2 Libraries recommends use of /etc/ld.so.conf instead of /etc/ld.so.conf.d
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:52:39AM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> * Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> [2009-03-17 17:02]:
> > What is the rational for making the library private in the first place ?
> In the case of the octave package, it is a decision of the upstream
> authors. I think that one of the reasons is to avoid name clashes between
> different branches of octave. For instance, we have curently:
> octave3.0: /usr/lib/octave-3.0.4/liboctave.so
> octave3.1: /usr/lib/octave-3.1.54/liboctave.so
Hmm, but what I see is this:
lrwxrwxrwx root/root 0 2009-03-12 02:10 ./usr/lib/octave-3.0.4/liboctave.so -> liboctave.so.3.0.4
So the real file does have the version in it, and as a result the runtime
libs should coexist just fine in /usr/lib?
You could continue to ship the .so symlinks in the subdirectories and
require -L lines when linking, while still avoiding monkeying around with
ld.so.conf.
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Reply to: