Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (162 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] Library packaging question
  • From: Dave Plater <dplater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:49:46 +0200
  • Message-id: <4B77C73A.6060608@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 02/14/2010 10:51 AM, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:
2010/2/14 Dave Plater <dplater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

Hi, the next generation of the package I maintain, blender has a new
feature called collada which enables 3D import and export similar to
cad's dxf file format. In order to enable this feature I've had to
incorporate a package called openCOLLADA into blender and the build of
the package produces several libraries named :-
Which following the "Shared_Library_Packaging_Policy" guidlines, I've
added a 0.0.0 suffix with symbolic links containing plain .so and .so.0.

The "Shared_Library_Packaging_Policy" guidlines say: "SONAME - the
name (query for it using objdump -x | grep SONAME)".
"0.0.0" is really the output you get from objdump or you just used
that because nothing else was available?

objdump -x doesn't give any output containing upper or lowercase soname
for any of the generated libs.
The libs build with an .so extension only, I had to add the 0.0.0 suffix
and create the links myself. This package is a work in progress package
from GOC and they state that the shared lib build is untested, in the
output from scons -h, but blender devels have tested it and are happy
that it works. I had to patch a few SConscripts and SConstruct to get it
to build properly with openSUSE expat and pcre.

I'm getting several rpmlint warning which would indicate to me that I've
done something wrong, "W: no-soname" for each lib and

Either these files aren't libraries but plugins (shouldn't be in
/usr/lib and should be packaged in the main blender package or
blender-plugins) or openCOLLADA doesn't follows any versioning scheme.
If the latter, either you worry about maintaining an openSUSE-specific
soname, or it's better to use the static versions of these libraries.

The "Shared_Library_Packaging_Policy" only makes sense if the
libraries maintain sonames that make sense (change every time the
binary compatibility is broken).

They are definitely libraries needed for blender-2.50 with Collada
import/export to build against and there are sure to be more packages
that use them in the future. They should be packaged separately once the
package is more mature as it also contains other 3D graphics rendering
At the moment I have to create the tarball from svn as there isn't a
release yet, I'm just getting the next generation blender in order in
advance. It will most probably be another month before blender-2.5 is
So what to do, fix the versioning and soname generation in openCOLLADA
or is there a way for me to package it successfully as it is without
altering it?
This is a good learning curve for me although collada is the most
resource hungry package I've ever built on my box.
Dave P

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >