[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       debian-devel
Subject:    Re: Question about libcdda_paranoia
From:       David Z Maze <dmaze () debian ! org>
Date:       2003-10-08 15:38:13
[Download RAW message or body]

Henning Moll <newsScott@gmx.de> writes:

> But now i am in a bit of trouble: i packaged a woody backport of k3b. 
> This programm tries to dlopen (=at runtime) 'libcdda_paranoia.so'. But 
> that is only possible if package 'libcdparanoia0-dev' is installed. 
> This would mean a dependency to a development package. 
> Is this a bug in k3b? Should k3b try to dlopen 'libcdda_paranoia.so.0' 
> instead?

That's probably what I would do...

> Is there a standard for so-naming (which is respected by all/ most
> Gnu/Linux distributions)?

Well, the actual process involved is something like this: you specify
-lfoo on the ld (cc) command line; the linker finds and reads
libfoo.so, and looks for the SONAME field in it; that soname
(typically libfoo.so.2) is written into the binary; when the binary is
loaded by ld.so, that looks for the libfoo.so.2 that was the soname.
So in the "normal" process, you only need lib*.so at build time, and
the major-version symlink at runtime.  Plus, if the major version of
the library chages, you'll probably need to change your program
anyways.  So I think explicitly writing in libcdda_paranoia.so.0 is
actually the right thing to do.

-- 
David Maze         dmaze@debian.org      http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/
"Theoretical politics is interesting.  Politicking should be illegal."
	-- Abra Mitchell


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]