Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (206 mails)

[Cristian Morales Vega <cmorve69@xxxxxxxx>]

2011/1/18 Christian Trippe <trippe_mailinglisten@xxxxxx>:
> libgetdatagzip-0_7_1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib libgetdatagzip-0.7.1.so
>  libgetdatalzma-0_7_1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib libgetdatalzma-0.7.1.so
>  libgetdatabzip2-0_7_1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib
> libgetdatabzip2-0.7.1.so
>  Your package matches the Shared Library Policy Naming Scheme but contains an
>  unversioned library. Therefore it is very unlikely that your package can be
>  installed in parallel to another version of this library package. Consider
>  moving unversioned parts into a runtime package.
>
>  libgetdatagzip-0_7_1.x86_64: W: shlib-policy-missing-lib
>  libgetdatalzma-0_7_1.x86_64: W: shlib-policy-missing-lib
>  libgetdatabzip2-0_7_1.x86_64: W: shlib-policy-missing-lib
>  Your package starts with 'lib' as part of it's name, but does not provide any
>  libraries. It must not be called a lib-package then. Give it a more sensible
>  name.
>
> Especially the second error sounds strange to me, as there is of course a
> library in each package.

The first one can be ignored. It's understandable why it says so, but
you know that "it is very *likely* that your package can be installed
in parallel to another version of this library package" since the
library name itself will change (to libgetdatagzip-0.7.2.so or
libgetdatagzip-0.8.0.so).

The second one IMHO is an error in the rpmlint check. But I don't know
the history, the "broken" part perhaps fixes something else. The thing
is that if all the libraries in a package show the
"shlib-unversioned-lib" warning then the "shlib-policy-missing-lib"
will also be shown. Since you have a single library and is detected as
unversioned...

But since I had to look into your package... There is something that
seems to be really wrong. I didn't verify, but I would say the only
real library is the one from "libgetdata4". It looks like
"libgetdatabzip2-0_7_1", "libgetdatagzip-0_7_1" and
"libgetdatalzma-0_7_1" aren't real libraries but just plugins for
"libgetdata4". In such a case those plugins should be installed inside
its own dir (e.g. /usr/lib64/getdata071), and the package name doesn't
needs to follow SLPP anymore.
To change this you probably will need to touch the source code. And
the patch should be submitted upstream. All this, again, supposing
libgetdataXXX are just plugins.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx