[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Package Build Report - Fedora Extras Development



On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 19:27 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 05 May 2005 18:35:33 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
> > Well, AFAICT, something is broken elsewhere, either in rpm, the
> > buildsystem or inside of the GLU's packaging.
> > 
> > > Both libGLU.so.1()(64bit) and libGL.so.1()(64bit) virtual provides do exist.
> > The actual question here is: 
> > What does "provides: libGLU.so.1" mean?
> 
> Well, first of all it means that the package includes a shared object
> library with the SONAME libGLU.so.1 and stores this library in dynamic
> linker's search path. (If it stores it elsewhere, that's a package bug
> IMHO).  Due to multilib it has become more complicated, apparently, as
> the SONAME is identical on every architecture, and only RPM seems to
> mark the 64-bit version in a package.
> 
> > > > say, rsp. what does 
> > > > "rpm -q --whatprovides libGLU.so"
> > > > 
> > > > with a both versions of libGLU.so installed report?
> > > 
> > > No package would ever provide that as a SONAME. Only querying
> > > the actual files with complete paths [as above] works.
> > Sorry, I meant
> > rpm -q --whatprovides libGLU.so.1
> 
> An i386 package. :)

Urgh, in other words, SONAME provides have become meaningless and
useless, i.e. rpm on x86-64 is severely borked :(

Ralf.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]