On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 06:13:12PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Feb 04, Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> wrote: > > Well, I guess such a new (conditinally selectable) name could be > > coordinated with glibc upstream? Say bump 32-bit ports to use libc6.1? > > (We already have precedent in some ports that do not use the same > > prevalent SONAME, such as libc6.1, libc0.1 and libc0.1.) But it would > > indeed involve lots of work, with massive amounts of package renames. :/ > > This may be a good time to mention that SONAMEs like libc6.1 are not > supported by libtool, so in libxcrypt I had to conditionally patch the > generated libtool executable for the architectures that did this.
What exactly went wrong? libpipeline uses libtool and I've never had to patch it for libc6.1. -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@debian.org]
