[csw-maintainers] GAR: Checks for shared library names

Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski maciej at opencsw.org
Mon Oct 11 08:02:59 CEST 2010

No dia 11 de Outubro de 2010 05:13, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski
> <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> ....
>> Here goes the summary:
>> 1. .so files should not be together with shared libraries.
> erm.. I presume you mean,
> "the SYMLINK for libxxxx.so ->libxxx.so.# should not go in the
> separated-out runtime package for the shared libraries".

Yes, and since the shared libraries should be in a separate package
anyway (in order for the library name and package name to match), they
don't end up in the same package, so they aren't together.

>> 2. If package contains multiple shared libraries, their versions
>> should match.  For example, libfoo.so.1.2.3 and libfoo_bar.so.1.2.3
>> are OK to be together, but libfoo.so.1.2.3 and libfoo.2.1.3 are not.
> I dont think it is okay to "mandate" that.
> Otherwise, you have to spell out more what to do when braindead
> upstream people lump non-matching version together

Here's a short writeup:

It boils down to how are sonames retired: together, or one by one.  If
soname versions don't match, they are most likely to be retired
individually.  Our main operational unit is a package (we can retire a
package, but not half a package), so we need to match up packages and
sonames if we want to retire an individual soname.

By the way, in case of packages such as fltk, where soname versions
are in sync, checkpkg nicely infers the right package name:


expected pkgname and catalogname:
  CSWlibfltk1-1, libfltk1_1

More information about the maintainers mailing list