Caution! Bad SONAME Provides

[Adam Jackson]

On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 19:32 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 13:11 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 11:16 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > On Friday 22 June 2007 11:09:39 Adam Jackson wrote:
> > > > How should I filter these, short of AutoReqProv: 0 ?
> > > 
> > > One "way" would be to not mark these libraries as executable.  IIRC rpm 
> > > autoprov/req scripts will only consider libraries that are marked as 
> > > executable.  Of course, that may kill /both/ provides and requires, and you 
> > > may want those requires to happen...
> > 
> > I thought dlopen would carp about non-executable files, but I appear to
> > be mistaken.
> > 
> > Another way, I suppose, would be to rip the soname field out of the DSO.
> Are you serious? IMO, this is the worst imaginable approach, directly
> leading into Windowish DLL hell.
> 
> The bugs related to SONAME handling are in rpm and the package managers.
> The SONAMEs are just the trigger, not cause.

Yes, I am serious.  I have lots of modules that you're never supposed to
link against.  They're called X drivers, they're dlopen-only.  The
soname is completely superfluous, and is only there because libtool is
such a flaming pile of crap.

- ajax