| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 01/08/2014 03:27 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 09:14:43PM +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: |
| 6 |
>> Robin H. Johnson wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> Comments: |
| 8 |
>>> --------- |
| 9 |
>>> In bug #4411, comment 43, vapier noted: |
| 10 |
>>>> any package that does dlopen("libfoo.so") without the version info like ".so.X" is broken. |
| 11 |
>>> In this case, the lt_dlopenext consumer is explicitly testing multiple |
| 12 |
>>> versions of libusb at runtime, and picking the correct interface: |
| 13 |
>>> it doesn't need to depend on a specific version. |
| 14 |
>> vapier is still correct and the consumer is indeed broken, it does |
| 15 |
>> too need to specify the .so version in the dlopen() call, at least |
| 16 |
>> in the case of libusb. |
| 17 |
>>> This is also because the lt_dlopenext interface does NOT accepted |
| 18 |
>>> files versioned after the .so: it needs the filename with no extensions. |
| 19 |
>> Hm, that seems limited? |
| 20 |
> It's NOT calling dlopen directly. It's calling the lt_dlopenext |
| 21 |
> interface from libtool. That iterates over the possible combinations |
| 22 |
> that end with ".so", and never iterates over the numbered suffixes. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> lt_dlforeachfile actully complicates it even more, but also doesn't see |
| 25 |
> the numbered suffixes. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> So should you're saying that we need to change libtool's code now? |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Or we could just stop randomly moving libs across the system and |
| 31 |
breaking things then hackmeating things back to a "working" state with |
| 32 |
gen_ld_script. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
The whole reason for having gen_ld_script is because people wanted |
| 35 |
dynamic libs in / and static libs in /usr (which seems insane) and it |
| 36 |
broke everything (because that idea is insane). Maybe we could just |
| 37 |
install all the libs together (either / or /usr) and stop pretending |
| 38 |
that what we are doing isn't wrong? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Just my 0.02$ |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
- -Zero |
| 43 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 44 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) |
| 45 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSzbhaAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKsJ4QAIhT02bWH1FxtZG5ALMQcEmr |
| 48 |
tnj9YeulX5zp7NCaX+k4MfUn/VgSCAlcjPcWhJW2D2nYIhAFs8uUUb75jhgaFiOr |
| 49 |
CIE5PamUE4FeE5NJ3tp2W2T+OXECmo0D0FUBg1ceDBadXDHncwjHS7Go3jTKdcsP |
| 50 |
BgVTda3kigoN2BTfj4Gd8WBL2qFMFbRSQlZ9RcmiWTKCNTRvp2bMovgCMpOSgTwg |
| 51 |
wIozmzaBTcYJH3TVC2p+Vkf0EZI00nMHAsLVyI/hbT97YVAxZWJG7N5UayK6IxBs |
| 52 |
zUxREifT8ZEDXliWuJLBIa6S6HiujViZeKty/1axuMPonM7oEBXeGKS6dT1IJz3J |
| 53 |
Hq1HEdccu66rfY1q8BakbKoR4SH2jeQhjP3Uaf/1NXb0sTRRqd7M9rnoTgmMMTfk |
| 54 |
HQw8iUWgrHoEkE/VV/2L8kAVAdYPP+Igpyqobib+2gLD6wiufCXRUog0jGtYMCZA |
| 55 |
wmGi43zWbXSqDhZ8tsyFLaHVbSqBlNRdiSW3XDB4hIrrveEF4++Cd0ecl3VIyXii |
| 56 |
gGxSNJajZxGXtDwQer2dF15J8GSi6inZ+ZJLSj30EcTnPzsLcdcZItnE9m/getQs |
| 57 |
3OMMDqnTvfYw/HrT9xcnOhg+YP2+NuufpOXXbQTbJXyQm0uDn6iFKIXVUPhek9R7 |
| 58 |
SEtDxmqBYrL95+c9IvQq |
| 59 |
=8D0j |
| 60 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives