[RFC] change packaging around shared libraries, ldconfig

[seth vidal]

On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 09:36 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Bill Nottingham wrote:
> 
> > Rex Dieter (rdieter at math.unl.edu) said:
> >> Doesn't ldconfig also update ld.so.cache?  If so, won't "bad things"
> >> happen if that cache is stale, like when/if 2 pkgs are installed in a
> >> transaction, and pkg #2 depends on shlibs from pkg #1?
> > 
> > If the cache is stale, it will look in the directories for something that
> > doesn't exist in the cache. I'm trying to think of a way the cache could
> > point to the wrong *version* of the library, but nothing is coming to
> > mind.
> 
> pkg #1 upgrade: old version includes libfoo.so.1, new version includes
> libfoo.so.2
> pkg #2: scriptlet requires something from pkg #1, which uses libfoo.so.2
> bang.

how would that break?

an update is an install then an erase.

so we install libfoo which drops in libfoo.so.2 and the symlinks it
needs

If the scriptlets have a special preun req then they need to have it
listed.

-sv