Subject: Re: Versions and uname output
To: Frederick Bruckman <email@example.com>
From: Todd Vierling <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/10/2003 14:45:55
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
: > Yes, this is the crux of the problem, and it has a solution that is simple
: > in concept but will require implementation work: Look at the libraries'
: > version numbers.
: I think it would be inelegant to stuff pkgsrc with numerous ".if
: exists(libc.so.12.83.1) || exists(libc.so.12.90)".
Hence "will require implementation work". This would need some support goop
to do dewey-like checking of version numbers.
: That reminds me, though: there are other uses for the library version
: numbers in pkgsrc. This proposal generated 0 responses, however:
I kept away from it since I was the original flame-stoker, but I did find
the proposal palatable. Your "Phase III" is *very* similar to the way RPM
does this, by looking up sonames in a database mapping back to packages.
However, sonames still don't fix the current thread's problem, where you
want to know that the library is at least of a given vintage (something that
is no longer encoded into binaries in ELF, because of truncated sonames).
-- Todd Vierling <email@example.com>