[lug] rpm spec: ldconfig-symlink

[Chan Kar Heng]

i didn't use any options either.
just dumped my library (say libfoo.so.0.0.0.0, which was linked with 
sonames) into /usr/lib, ran ldconfig, & the links just appear (of 
course, only up to 2 levels of symlinks).

sorry can't help with rpmlint... :(

send an email to the rpmlint developers?


rgds,

kh

David L. Anselmi wrote:
> D. Stimits wrote:
> [...]
> 
>> ldconfig does have an option to create sym links. It appears it sym 
>> links the physical/real file name to the soname. I can't find how this 
>> differs from ln -s, except that (a) it might be safer than loading ln 
>> in a script, and (b) it automatically chooses the soname.
> 
> 
> I didn't use any options.  It made symlinks.  Another difference from ln 
> -s is that ldconfig updates the library cache the loader uses.
> 
>> ldconfig -l does indeed do fewer sym links, and without the -l, it 
>> does not make any sym links.
> 
> 
> That wasn't my experience, I didn't use -l.
> 
>> If rpmlint would accept the sym links, I would be ok with this, but it 
>> doesn't. I have a properly built and linked dynamic library (even the 
>> rpmlint documentation seems to think I used the right options), but 
>> regardless of how I do it, rpmlint claims:
>> <quote>
>>  > rpmlint -i libMyLib-0.0.0-1.i386.rpm
>> E: libMyLib no-ldconfig-symlink /usr/lib/libMyLib.so.0.0.0
>> The package should not only include the shared library itself, but
>> also the symbolic link which ldconfig would produce. (This is
>> necessary, so that the link gets removed by dpkg automatically when
>> the package gets removed.)  If the symlink is in the package, check
>> that the SONAME of the library matches the info in the shlibs
>> file.
>> </quote>
>