(missed this mail in my enormous inbox, sorry :) On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 08:34:43PM -0700, Seth Arnold wrote: > > They need to be exempt from the rule for shlibs file, too. > > > > See my attempt in #66023... > > Aye, too true. It may be easier for the proposal to not decide the paths > involved -- it should be sufficient to say which paths are *not* > allowed.
Where else except in subdirs of /usr/lib should the > --- policy.txt Thu Apr 26 19:31:26 2001 > +++ so-policy.txt Thu Apr 26 19:57:17 2001 > @@ -2313,6 +2313,15 @@ > library links point to them, just before `dpkg' continues the > installation and removes the links! > > + It is the case that some packages supply plugins intended for > + internal use only and these plugins are often technically shared > + libraries. Here you do the same thing in making stuff overly specific, as I did :) Someone might not want to call these libs plugins. Someone might want to define "internal use" diffently (two or more packages using them). > If the plugin files are not installed in the default > + search path of `ld.so' (currently /lib, /usr/lib), or in common > + locations specified in `/etc/ld.so.conf' (such as /usr/X11R6/lib), > + then the package's plugins are not required to comply with the > + paragraph requiring symbolic links nor the `shlibs' sections > + following. And any modification of ld.so.conf isn't described, but it happened (happens) `in the wild', like in xaw3d packages. I'd prefer if people seconded the diff in #66023 :) and then we can refine that stuff further if necessary. -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
