[Fedora-packaging] Re: ldconfig -X in scriptlets?

[Axel Thimm]

On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 03:18:06PM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 11:39:41AM +0300, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > ldconfig has -X option which disables the symlink modifications, so
> > > I'd like to propose adding the option to recommended %post (and
> > > possibly also %postun) scriptlet to avoid such surprises.
> > > 
> > > Comments?
> > 
> > What would create the symlinks, if ldconfig -X is used everywhere?
> 
> rpm should do that as symlinks are packaged. If applications suddenly fail
> to start we know there is a packaging bug. Ideally ldconfig wouldn't
> touch packaged libraries at all and just update ld.so.cache.

Yes, that makes a lot of sense. But I guess there will be quite a few
packages that will break, so maybe this is a feature for F13?

> Adding -X only to packages that need it won't help much though. I
> didn't realize that to avoid the unexpected symlink modifications all
> packages would have to use -X because in a transaction all %post
> scripts are executed before old files are removed.

It would probably need to be mass-edited. Most ldconfig calls have a
typical scheme as a shell replacement, so one could catch a lot
automatically. At the very least it would allow to identify and
bugzilla packages that have ldconfig uses in non-typical ways. I just
wonder if there are implicit uses of ldconfig in other tools used
during install time we might be missing.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20090806/3eab3254/attachment.sig>