Jens Elkner writes: > > I don't think one can completely > > understand dependency by parsing the output from > > elfdump. > > Right, but at least you get the basic work done and at least for > trivial packages its sufficient. Of course, e.g. some software > requires perl not only for some netty gritty stuff but for real > operation, so a P *perl* should be added as well aka the basic work > doesn't free one from reviewing/understanding the software, if the > package should be get close to "perfect" ;-)
It's not just somewhat exotic things such as dlopen and embedded uses of popen. It's in ordinary things such as scripts -- some software contains a great deal of scripting, and determining correct dependencies for those is both difficult and error-prone because it's a manual process. And, as I mentioned before, there's really not much point in doing this as a single-shot event. If you can't maintain it over time, then all you've done is create an attractive nuisance -- something that looks like it contains correct dependencies, but in fact is no more reliable than the guesswork it replaced. The dependencies will rot over time. If you're going to do this at all, the effort _must_ be accompanied by the creation of tools and processes that will keep the information accurate. I think it's easy to throw rocks at the people who've failed to give you what you're asking for here. I also think it's fairly difficult to resolve the problem in a way that doesn't just create new problems. -- James Carlson, KISS Network <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
