On Jul 15, 2007, at 12:59 PM, Jakub Bogusz wrote: >> >> Well, I'll remove the mono scripts (added 2 days ago) from rpm >> sources. ;-) > > Oops, I didn't know that :) >
;-) Actually external per-interpreter rpm helpers is preferred, PLD just got there first, as always ;-) >>> Actually: >>> 1. We can safely generate (arch-dependent) soname dependencies for >>> arch-dependent dotnet* packages (those with glue ELF libraries, like >>> gtk-sharp, or gnome-sharp, which started this discussion). >>> mono-find-requires script can detect mono version basing on monodis >>> (or libmono.so) ELF type. >>> >>> 2. if we decide to generate soname dependencies for some noarch >>> dotnet* package, it won't by noarch any longer. >>> >> >> If there are soname dependencies, the package is not "noarch", is it? > > In case of mono/dotnet assemblies (*.dll) without native glue code > library sonames are specified in text/xml file (*.dll.config), and > libraries themselves are dlopened by mono - so assembly packages don't > contain anything arch-dependent. Oops, I dinna know that. Lots I don't know about mono, I've never knowingly needed or used. Ah, so two-level linkage through some dlopen() mechanism to maintain a "noarch" fiction. The offer to send a patch if you send me a test case remains. It sounds like the dependencies can be handled externally to rpm, the "soname" is what I reacted to. Note that the mono-helpers are invoked per-file, necessary iff the traditional model is continued: cat monofileslist | mono-helper > monodepslist 73 de Jeff _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en