[csw-maintainers] Shared library placement proposal

[Peter FELECAN]

Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:

> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Peter FELECAN <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:
>>
>>>
>>> "Public shared libraries, the ones that other software projects can
>>> link to, should be put directly under /opt/csw/lib.
>>> If a project is compiled using a custom prefix and the installer puts
>>> shared libraries under /opt/csw/foo/lib, [change start here]
>>> a symlink  /opt/csw/libXX -> /opt/csw/foo/lib/libXXX, should be
>>> created. Additionally, this symlink should be created IF and ONLY if,
>>> the SONAME and filename for the library are unique. If on the other
>>> hand, there is potential for multiple versions of the library to be
>>> installed at one time, under different prefixes (/opt/csw/foo3,4,5),
>>> and the SONAME is not unique, then no symlink in /opt/csw/lib should
>>> be created.
>>> "
>>>
>>> Rational for this has already been given in the above-referenced email thread.
>>
>> The rationale was re-read and I still don't get it. Can you develop in a
>> more intelligible way please?
>
> I'm not sure how I could make it any more clear. It seems pretty clear to me.
> So instead, let me put it to you another way:

This is exactly what I expected. Thanks.

> "it's less work".
>
> Just adding in a symlink from /opt/csw/lib to whereever, is less work
> than having to move a file from /opt/csw/prefix to /opt/csw/lib, and
> then also having to make a symlink from /opt/csw/prefix to the new
> location. One action, vs two.

Well, you'll agree that the difference, in terms of effort, is quite
insignificant, isn't it?

> We need to have the library visible in both locations, to avoid
> confusion to both users, and potential auto-detect scripts. Ones that
> tend to have single flags like --use-libfoo=/prefix, rather than 3
> separate flags for --usr-libfoo-lib, --use-libfoo-include,
> --use-libfoo-iforgettheotherthing

I was quite opposed to this specific directories for different
versions but lived with its inconveniences. Now that we have
alternatives, it's really a PITA.

Anyhow, what I wish is to not make it mandatory to separate different
versions of the same project, which make sense to be installed
simultaneously, in different directories but to be able to use
alternatives and shared objects in /opt/csw/lib as a accepted solution.

> And to reply in advance to Maciej, I dont think that "well we can just
> let GAR do the work, so 'more work' doesnt count", applies.  We could
> inappropriately justify all kinds of nonsense with that attitude.

I agree.
-- 
Peter