| 1 |
On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 21:52 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 2 |
> Paul de Vrieze wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Wednesday 28 December 2005 17:26, Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> >>I just picked some package as an example of the output with |
| 6 |
> >>openoffice-bin. My understanding here is that if you link against those |
| 7 |
> >>libraries, it will break break binary packages because dependencies |
| 8 |
> >>don't say to pull in required libraries. This just means that apr-util |
| 9 |
> >>should be fixed. |
| 10 |
> >> |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > By the way, you might want to check the locations of libraries. Openoffice-bin |
| 14 |
> > does not satisfy the dependency for the db library. It namely is outside the |
| 15 |
> > library search path (and it should be). You might want to use ld.so.conf with |
| 16 |
> > the rpath attribute of the binary to determine which libraries to consider. |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Working on it with solar. I just put the || in there until I have |
| 20 |
> something better. Thinking about libstdc++-v3 having all the |
| 21 |
> alternatives is also useful. Developers should know that the one from |
| 22 |
> openoffice is not used. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
We just added -L to be used with -n in scanelf(pax-utils-0.1.6) to |
| 25 |
search the ld.so.cache. It works in uclibc and glibc environments and |
| 26 |
handles 32/64 bit dupes. We can't verify any of the *BSD's at this time |
| 27 |
however as we no access to one of it's caches. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
solar <solar@g.o> |
| 31 |
Gentoo Linux |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives