[csw-maintainers] [POLICY] Shared library placement proposal

[Maciej Bliziński]

[I forgot to add the policy tag in the subject line of the original
post.  Apologies. --Maciej]

2011/2/4 Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>:
> 2011/2/4 Maciej Bliziński <maciej at opencsw.org>:
>> ...
>> It does add some complexity, I agree.  But it does it for a good
>> reason: we want to avoid other projects accidentally linking to a
>> library which was thought to be private, ...
>
> In other words, to reserve namespace of shared libraries.
>
> I agree that this is a good thing, and that we should do "something" for it.
> However, putting symlinks in /opt/csw/lib to a prefixed library's
> location, is a perfectly valid 'something' for this purpose.

Yes, I agree that using symlink can be a valid solution.  However,
using symlinks vs regular files is a tangential issue.

Perhaps we should not include anything about files vs symlinks in the
proposal.  This can be covered by a separate proposal.  If you care
about this, would you like to put forward a proposal regarding the use
of symlinks?

Let's continue the shared library placement discussion.  How about the
following:

--------------------8<---------------------

+++ Public shared libraries

Public shared libraries, the ones that other software projects can
link to, should be kept in /opt/csw/lib.

64-bit libraries should be kept under /opt/csw/lib/amd64 and
/opt/csw/lib/sparcv9 on their respective platforms.

--------------------8<---------------------

This phrasing is simple, and does not say anything about file types.
Does it sound better?

Maciej