[csw-maintainers] commentary on shared library naming proposal

[Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski]

No dia 27 de Dezembro de 2010 22:25, Dagobert Michelsen
<dam at opencsw.org> escreveu:
> Hi Maciej,
>
> Am 26.12.2010 um 18:42 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski:
>> Checkpkg currently uses library location to determine whether library
>> is linkable.  I'm not sure why private kerberos libraries are put in
>> the public space.  In theory, anybody could add an "-lfoo" option to
>> the compiler invocation, and that would bring us back to the original
>> problem.
>
> A side note: If I read you correctly you changed your mind and are
> also going with "shallow"-type packaging of postgres as it would
> deliver libs in
>  /opt/csw/<postgres-xx>/lib/libfoo.so
> instead of your (condired private)
>  /opt/csw/lib/<postgres-xx>/libfoo.so
>
> Right?

No, my current idea is different: There are essentially two packages:
libpq and postgresql.  I'll try to package postgresql stuff using deep
paths to achieve a setup in which you can run multiple versions at the
same time.  libpq on the other hand will be packaged straight into
/opt/csw/lib.  Even though libpq is built from postgresql sources, it
is not bound to any specific postgresql version.  If you build
libpq.so.5, it's just libpq.so.5, so we'll have CSWlibpq5, which will
behave like any other regular shared library package.

To recap:

CSWlibpq:
/opt/csw/lib/libpq.so.5

CSWpostgresql90:
/opt/csw/lib/postgres/9.0/... (etc)