> On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 06:05:43PM +0300, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 10:14:16PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > > Comment to myself: The current patch probably breaks dh_shlibdeps > > > -l option because it doesn't honor LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Can someone > > > tell me a package which really needs this option? The ones that > > > I tested so far seem to build equally fine without it... > > > > This option wasneeded when package builds a binary that uses libraries > > built from the same source package. In this case, libraries may not be > > available outside of package build directory; so ldd called from > > dpkg-shlibdeps won't find them witout LD_LIBRARY_PATH. > > > > Don't yet know how this situation is handled in your patched > > dpkg-shlibdeps... > > Hmm, but dpkg-shlibdeps already tries to take care of this by using > all local shlibs files. Can someone point me to a package that really > misbuilds without -l ? This would really help me to understand the > real problem.
dpkg-shlibdeps calls ldd, which will just fail if LD_LIBRARY_PATH won't point to directories with local libraries. defined($c= open(P,"-|")) || syserr("cannot fork for ldd"); if (!$c) { exec("ldd","--",$exec[$i]); syserr("cannot exec ldd"); } while (<P>) { if (m,^\s+(\S+)\s+=>\s+(\S+)\s+\(0x.+\)?$,) { $so2path{$1} = $2; } } close(P); $? && subprocerr("ldd on \`$exec[$i]'"); If I understand this code correctly, it will go to subprocerr() and die if ldd returns non-zero. Any package that uses local libs will be affected. E.g. zlib (if built in environment where zlib is not yet installed). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]