[opensuse-packaging] Directory versioning policy for library packages
Hi, I have stumbled over a small problem regarding versioned directories. Currently, it is expected a versioned library uses a pattern like /usr/lib/ libfoo-1_2_3/bar.so. Although this allows multiple packages, it is contrary to what some upstreams use for versioning, e.g. /usr/lib/libfoo/1.2.3/bar.so. From an RPM perspective, both are ok, as directories can be owned by multiple packages. rpmlint throws an "W: shlib-policy-nonversioned-dir" warning, which is IMHO wrong. Kind regards, Stefan -- Stefan Brüns / Bergstraße 21 / 52062 Aachen home: +49 241 53809034 mobile: +49 151 50412019 work: +49 2405 49936-424 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 2015-12-29 21:50, Stefan Bruens wrote:
I have stumbled over a small problem regarding versioned directories.
Currently, it is expected a versioned library uses a pattern like /usr/lib/ libfoo-1_2_3/bar.so. Although this allows multiple packages, it is contrary to what some upstreams use for versioning, e.g. /usr/lib/libfoo/1.2.3/bar.so.
From an RPM perspective, both are ok, as directories can be owned by multiple packages. rpmlint throws an "W: shlib-policy-nonversioned-dir" warning, which is IMHO wrong.
Yes, rpmlint is not the brightest tool in the shed. Ignore it. The real intention, as you have correctly determined, is to have paths which do not overlap, so that a v1.2.3 loader won't accidentally look into a directory which has v1.2.4 plugins. [That's also why /usr/lib/perl5/5.22.X is totally fine -- they even use an arch tuple for bonus points.] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi, On Wed, 30 Dec 2015, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Yes, rpmlint is not the brightest tool in the shed. Ignore it.
Better: improve it :) Ciao, Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday 2016-01-11 16:45, Michael Matz wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2015, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Yes, rpmlint is not the brightest tool in the shed. Ignore it.
Better: improve it :)
You know how software projects work. As long as there are workarounds, passers-by will simply not bother. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
participants (3)
-
Jan Engelhardt -
Michael Matz -
Stefan Bruens