rpm AutoRequires/AutoProvides and dsos not in linker path, do we care ?
Chuck Anderson
cra at WPI.EDU
Wed Jun 17 21:59:11 UTC 2009
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.
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list