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

Re: rpm AutoRequires/AutoProvides and dsos not in linker path, do we care ?

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:02:04PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 10:06 -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 02:57:53PM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
> > > b.2) extend the autorequires/autoprovides in some (handwaves) way to
> > > better indicate the desired match
> > 
> > I like this idea better.  AutoReq/Prov should only search system-wide 
> > deafult search paths for .so's, perl modules, and any other such 
> > objects that it supports.
> "system-wide" includes paths mentioned in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/*, which are
> files provided by other packages.  Suddenly your search scope is
> unbounded again.

Not really unbounded.  If a package puts a file in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ 
then the library is now available system-wide, so it should be 
searched by autorequires/autoprovides.  Basically the rule should be, 
if a package provides something in the global name space (.so, perl 
module, etc.) then the RPM package should auto-Provide it.  If it is 
kept in a private namespace (not searched by ld.so, not in perl module 
path, etc.) then it shouldn't add an auto-Provide.

> Really we just need the moral equivalent of %exclude for autoreqprovs.

That would still require manual packager intervention.  It would be 
good to have, but I would argue that fixing the automatic stuff would 
be better.

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