[lug] library naming conventions, sym links

[D. Stimits]

...
>>...then a sym link created for
>>libSomeLib.so.0.0 -> libSomeLib.so.0.0.0
>>libSomeLib.so.0 -> libSomeLib.0.0
>>libSomeLib.so -> libSomeLib.0
...
>>However, it seems that rpm is telling me this is wrong. Rpm seems to 
>>want to do this, where libSomeLib.so.0.0.0 is the hard link:
>>libSomeLib.so -> libSomeLib.so.0.0.0
>>libSomeLib.so.0 -> libSomeLib.so.0.0.0
>>libSomeLib.so.0.0 -> libSomeLib.so.0.0.0
...
> 
> The only difference I see in your question is the linking order

Nope...in the first variation the .so points at the .so.0, and the .so.0 
points at .so.0.0, which in turn points at .so.0.0.0.

In the latter variation, all sym links point directly at .so.0.0.0. The 
former chains them together from least detailed version to most detailed 
version.

D. Stimits, stimits AT comcast DOT net