Subject: Re: Shared library symlinks and libtool
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Alistair Crooks <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/24/2001 14:28:04
On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 01:43:02PM +0100, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> After Alistair's recent change to make ELF PLISTs default, some
> programs have problems in the installation phase. In particular, I
> think of devel/xdelta (and some others) where the problem lies in the
> fact that they install a library 'libfoo.so.1.2.3', and libtool only
> generates symlinks for 'libfoo.so.1' and 'libfoo.so'.
> What is the proper target to fix -- the PLISTs (removing the
> 'libfoo.so.1.2' entries) or libtool (making it create the
> 'libfoo.so.1.2' symlinks)?
I don't know the answer, but would just like to point out that the
previous behaviour in bsd.pkg.mk was, on ELF platforms, to create
PLIST entries for libfoo.so.1.2, libfoo.so.1 and libfoo.so, and also
to create symlinks in the target filesystem for this.
The new PLISTs should simply document what libtool produces, and I
*think* that means only listing two of the three possible symlinks,
but that gives us slight problems with the print-PLIST target on
a.out boxes generating perhaps erroneous PLISTs. This is easy
enough to fix - I just need to know what libtool does with a shared
object when given a shared object with three version numbers.
I am not a libtool person, and have no desire to be.