[Bug 190664] Review Request: keyutils - Kernel key management userspace utilities

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: keyutils - Kernel key management userspace utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190664





------- Additional Comments From dhowells at redhat.com  2006-05-05 08:00 EST -------
> Well, how comes the rest of the world is not following this proposal?

glibc and binutils both use it.

> The only thing that matters is the SONAME, the library's filename is largely
> ignorable (c.f. info libtool, for why this naming is considered harmful).

Well, in my libtool info page, in section 6.4 (Managing release information), 
it holds up `libbfd-2.9.0.so' as the example of naming.

> With this, I end up with
>  /lib/libkeyutils-1.1.1.fc4.so

The library's filename is, as you said, largely ignorable; and the fact that 
the library version number contains 'fc4' will not cause binary 
incompatibility, since the SONAME is set to the interface symlink 
(/lib/keyutils.so.N).

What would you suggest? I want the release number in there since the library 
may well be different between two compilations. I suppose I could edit out the 
distribution tag, but that's messy.

Anyway, I've fixed the Makefile problem and the double-slash problem:

SPEC URL: 
http://people.redhat.com/~dhowells/keyutils/keyutils-1.1-2/keyutils.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://people.redhat.com/~dhowells/keyutils/keyutils-1.1-2/keyutils.spec

The static library should be there as this library wraps some system calls 
that aren't available through glibc.

Btw, note that PAM and mount may both need to use the library in this package 
at some point.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.