Re: [opensuse-packaging] rpmlint error shlib-policy-missing-suffix?

2010/1/24 Dave Plater :

On 01/24/2010 11:25 AM, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...

2010/1/24 Dave Plater :

...

|Hi, the explanation for "||shlib-policy-missing-suffix ||Your package containing shared libraries does not end in a digit and should probably be split.||" seems to be missing from: http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/RpmLint What does it mean, what libs and split into what?

Just that shared libraries must be packaged following this: http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/Shared_Library_Packaging_Policy

The lib dir contains :- libbaccfg.so.1      libbacfind.so        libbac.la    libbacpy.so.1 libbac.so.1      libbacsql.so libbaccfg.la  libbaccfg.so.1.0.0  libbacfind.so.1      libbacpy.la libbacpy.so.1.0.0  libbac.so.1.0.0  libbacsql.so.1 libbaccfg.so  libbacfind.la       libbacfind.so.1.0.0  libbacpy.so libbac.so          libbacsql.la     libbacsql.so.1.0.0

I see that the co-maintainer has put the .la and plain .so libs in the devel package, is this right?

Yes, .la and .so files go to the -devel package. The SLPP says so in the point that start with "Files needed to develop programs using shared libraries". But in "Best Practices" it also says: "Avoid packaging libtool config files (.la files)...". So .la files shouldn't be packaged if they aren't **really** needed. The rpmlint warning comes from: %files server ... %{_libdir}/libbac*.so.* The ".so.*" files should go to a new package (or packageS) named as SLPP says. I don't know if it's the case, but If the only binaries that will use these libraries are contained in the -server package it isn't a "real" problem. But still splitting them would do no harm. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org