Your message dated Wed, 19 May 2010 06:58:30 -0700
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#582221: libldap(_r).so provided by libldap2-dev
instead of libldap-2.4-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #582221,
regarding libldap(_r).so provided by libldap2-dev instead of libldap-2.4-2
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
582221: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=582221
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libldap-2.4-2
Version: 2.4.11-1+lenny1
Severity: normal
Hello,
The compilation of OpenLDAP produces these library files:
libldap_r-2.4.so.2.5.4
libldap_r-2.4.so.2 -> libldap_r-2.4.so.2.5.4
libldap_r.so -> libldap_r-2.4.so.2.5.4
libldap-2.4.so.2.5.4
libldap-2.4.so.2 -> libldap-2.4.so.2.5.4
libldap.so -> libldap-2.4.so.2.5.4
These files are reparted on the following binary packages:
libldap-2.4-2: libldap_r-2.4.so.2 libldap_r-2.4.so.2.*.*
libldap2-dev: libldap_r.so
In addition, the libraries without “_r” are created as symlinks to the “_r”
ones, on the corresponding packages.
I do not understand why libldap_r.so and libldap.so, that are symlinks to
libldap_r-2.4.so.2.5.4, are installed on libldap2-dev. This is the development
package, that contains headers, static libraries and manpages, so I do not see
why it should contain a dynamic library symlink that is rather a run-time file.
Maybe these libldap_r.so and libldap.so should be moved to libldap-2.4-2?
Regards,
--
Tanguy Ortolo
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 5.0.4
APT prefers stable
APT policy: (990, 'stable'), (60, 'testing'), (50, 'unstable'), (1,
'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-3-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages libldap-2.4-2 depends on:
ii libc6 2.10.2-6 Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib
ii libgnutls26 2.8.5-2 the GNU TLS library - runtime libr
ii libsasl2-2 2.1.22.dfsg1-23+lenny1 Cyrus SASL - authentication abstra
libldap-2.4-2 recommends no packages.
libldap-2.4-2 suggests no packages.
-- no debconf information
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 10:27:49AM +0200, Tanguy Ortolo wrote:
> I do not understand why libldap_r.so and libldap.so, that are symlinks to
> libldap_r-2.4.so.2.5.4, are installed on libldap2-dev. This is the development
> package, that contains headers, static libraries and manpages, so I do not see
> why it should contain a dynamic library symlink that is rather a run-time
> file.
> Maybe these libldap_r.so and libldap.so should be moved to libldap-2.4-2?
No, they should not. These are *not* runtime files, the unqualified library
names are only meant to be used at build time.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
[email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- End Message ---
