Comment # 47 on bug 1177260 from Stefan Br���ns

(In reply to Egbert Eich from comment #46)
> (In reply to Stefan Br���ns from comment #45)
> > 
> > I think for Leap/SLE 15, the old SONAME is actually the better option.
> > Otherwise, you need a full rebuild (at least the parts which directly or
> > indirectly use openblas), othwerwise you may end up with a binary which
> > links to openblas.so and openblas_pthreads.so at the same time.
> > 
> > If you don't do a rebuild, you may end up with a user using the openmp
> > openblas.so via update alternatives, and openblas_pthreads.so. I a quite
> > sure this will not work.
> 
> Well, the old SONAME scheme would require even more %if ... %endif mess in
> the spec file. 
> All standard binaries are built for openblas_pthreads.so.0. If we provide a
> compatibility link, why would a user end up with two openblas libraries?
> Because  of a binary requiring two libs that themselves require openblas -
> one of which has been rebuilt and one hasn't?

Yes, a dependency on both libraries, directly or indirectly, even over multiple
indirections.

E.g. everything that embeds a python interpreter, and uses numpy, or scipy.
Other examples probably exist.