[CFT] Fixing/changing LIB_DEPENDS

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 06:58:16PM +0200, olli hauer wrote:
> On 2013-06-13 15:07, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Here is a patch to fix LIB_DEPENDS.
> > 
> > First what is/are the problem of LIB_DEPENDS.
> > 
> > LIB_DEPENDS relies on of ldconfig -r to get its valid or not installed shared
> > libraries, problem is:
> > liba-5.2.so and liba-5.so.2 will both be a-5.2 for ldconfig -r, which is not
> > really what we want.
> > 
> > secondly ldconfig -r is only able to print something for libraries in the form
> > of: lib<name>.so[.number], while we have no technical limitation to enforce this
> > form and it is more and more common to find libraries in the following form:
> > lib<name>.so.major.minor.patch and to get them working properly right know we
> > have to patch the upstream build system, to send some magic tricks on libtool
> > etc, all that kind of things all of us loves to deal with.
> > 
> > What I do propose is a new form of LIB_DEPENDS in addition to the current one:
> > LIB_DEPENDS=	bla.so[numberwithlongorwhatever]:${PORTSDIR}/cat/bla
> > 
> > What the framework will do, is lookup in all libraries directories for
> > libbla.so[numberwithdotsorwhatever] test if it exists (test -f also validate the
> > symlink is pointing to a regular file) if /usr/bin/file is present on your
> > system it will validate the pointed file is really a shared library.
> > 
> > Any review welcome: http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/fix-libdepends.patch
> > 
> > This idea behind this patch is on mid/long term to remove the other LIB_DEPENDS
> > forms.
> > 
> > I do plan to commit this on next friday 2013-06-21.
> > 
> > regards,
> > Bapt
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> Hm,
> 
> so this is a modern extended incarnation of the old LIB_DEPENDS notation
> For example pcre.3:... becomes pcre:...
> 
> Isn't this something that can be handled with some additional code in pathfix?
> 
> --
> regards,
> olli
> 

Either I m missing something, or I don't see the point about pathfix.

It is not a matter of path, but rather allowing the ports tree to handle
properly all kind of library name, right now we have some false limitation and
library name collision because we wrongly rely on ldconfig -r.

we have lots of patches so convert library names to a format
libname.so.asinglenumber, just for the sake of a technical limitation of the
ports tree.

That is what I m trying to fix.

regards,
Bapt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20130613/8459dce0/attachment.sig>