Re: ldconfig / dynamic linker hints library name conventions

From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock_at_gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 17:16:42 +0100
On Wednesday 10 December 2003 00:40, Tim Kientzle wrote:
> Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> > From the ldconfig manpage:
> >
> > "Filenames must conform to the lib*.so.[0-9] pattern in order to
> > be added to the hints file."
> >
> > I wonder if there actually are any compelling reasons to keep this
> > behaviour -
>
> Yes there are.  Not all shared libraries are meant to be seen
> by ldconfig.  

This isn't very convincing. The reality looks much more like this: Many 
software packages out there assume ldconfig and workalikes to be as liberal 
with regards to shared library filenames as linux' ldconfig (or NetBSD's 
ld.elf_so) and install libraries named lib*.so.[0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+. If 
libtool weren't as widely used as it is for building shared libraries, this 
would make for a bigger problem than it is now. Packages that actually do 
install shared libraries which are exclusively dlloaded usually put those in 
a location where they won't be picked up by ldconfig, like a subdirectory in 
PREFIX/lib.

-- 
   ,_,   | Michael Nottebrock               | lofi_at_freebsd.org
 (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve     | http://www.freebsd.org
   \u/   | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org

Received on Wed Dec 10 2003 - 07:16:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:33 UTC