Re: Riddled by debian-policy 8.1.1 about ldconfig

libraries complying with the Policy, you will see that this file indeed "activate-noawait" the "ldconfig" trigger. For packages built using Debhelper, the triggers files is added by `dh_makeshlibs`, which explains why you can not see traces of it in the clean source package. I

Re: Riddled by debian-policy 8.1.1 about ldconfig

Hello, >Shared libraries must now invoke "ldconfig" by means of triggers, >instead of maintscripts. I think this is automatically generated during build, if you don't override it. so, if you don't have them, you are safe :) G.

Riddled by debian-policy 8.1.1 about ldconfig

must now invoke "ldconfig" by means of triggers, instead of maintscripts. The packages install libburn.so.4, libisofs.so.6, libisoburn.so.1. But their current ./debian directories do not contain files preinst, postinst, prerm or postrm. Further there is no text "ldconfig" in

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

Hi Herbert, On 06/10/2015, Herbert Parentes Fortes Neto wrote: > Hi Alex, > > >> >> >>> rm -f >> >> >>> /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE-device.fdi >> >> >>> || true > >> > What errors if using 'rm -f', right ? >> > >> What do you mean by

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 22:42:25 +0800 Alex Vong wrote: > Hi Herbert, > > On 06/10/2015, Herbert Parentes Fortes Neto wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > > > > >> >> >>> rm -f > >> >> >>> /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE-device.fdi > >>

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

Hi Alex, > >> >>>rm -f > >> >>> /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE-device.fdi > >> >>> || true > > What errors if using 'rm -f', right ? > > > What do you mean by that? Could you please explain further? Using 'rm -f' doesn't return a error. if I do (TESTE

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

sr/share/hal/fdi/information/20thirdparty/$PACKAGE.fdi || >> >>> true >> >>> rm -f >> >>> /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE.fdi || >> >>> true >> >>> rm -f >> >>> /usr/share/hal/fd

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

gt;>> rm -f > >>> /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE.fdi || > >>> true > >>> rm -f > >>> /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE-device.fdi > >>> || true > >>>

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

; /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE.fdi || > >>> true > >>> rm -f > >>> /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE-device.fdi > >>> || true > >>> ldconfig > >>> ;; > >

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

re/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE-device.fdi || true ldconfig ;; Lintian is quiet now. Wait, what's this? debhelper takes care of all of this, the old version added a bunch of code replacing the '#DEBHELPER#' string, the new one adds a dpkg trigger. So

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

Hi Mattia, On 10/05/2015 05:52 PM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 03:56:57PM -0300, Herbert Parentes Fortes Neto wrote: >> Lintian informs about the use of ldconfig >> in postrm script of libgphoto2. It says even >> where to put the cmd. Good! >

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

0thirdparty/$PACKAGE.fdi || true > > >>> rm -f > > >>> /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE.fdi || > > >>> true > > >>> rm -f > > >>> /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/10-camera-$PACKAGE-

ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

Hi, Lintian informs about the use of ldconfig in postrm script of libgphoto2. It says even where to put the cmd. Good! What I understood reading the manpage is to put the cmd without options is enough. Is like this: libgphoto2-6.postrm remove) rm -f /usr/share/hal/fdi/information

Re: ldconfig in a post(rm|inst) script

On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 03:56:57PM -0300, Herbert Parentes Fortes Neto wrote: > Lintian informs about the use of ldconfig > in postrm script of libgphoto2. It says even > where to put the cmd. Good! before all, be aware that usually lib maintainers don't need to do this explicete

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Le 05/02/2015 13:39, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda a écrit : El Dijous, 5 de febrer de 2015, a les 11:09:23, Corentin Desfarges va escriure: Le 05/02/2015 10:50, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda a écrit : El Dijous, 5 de febrer de 2015, a les 10:24:25, Corentin Desfarges va escriure: Are you sure that

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Le 05/02/2015 14:50, Corentin Desfarges a écrit : Le 05/02/2015 11:40, Andreas Tille a écrit : Hi, On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:50:15AM +0100, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: By the way, we have to add wget as build-deps of the package in d/control. No, it's the lack of wget as build

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

El Dijous, 5 de febrer de 2015, a les 11:09:23, Corentin Desfarges va escriure: Le 05/02/2015 10:50, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda a écrit : El Dijous, 5 de febrer de 2015, a les 10:24:25, Corentin Desfarges va escriure: Are you sure that in build time do you need to download some data? is

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Le 05/02/2015 11:40, Andreas Tille a écrit : Hi, On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:50:15AM +0100, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: By the way, we have to add wget as build-deps of the package in d/control. No, it's the lack of wget as build dependency. I'm trying to build again the package. I have

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Le 05/02/2015 10:24, Corentin Desfarges a écrit : Are you sure that in build time do you need to download some data? is this acceptable? Leopold Yes I need to download the data, else the unit tests can't pass... And I can't include the data into the package, because of its the size (more

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Le 05/02/2015 10:50, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda a écrit : El Dijous, 5 de febrer de 2015, a les 10:24:25, Corentin Desfarges va escriure: Are you sure that in build time do you need to download some data? is this acceptable? Leopold Yes I need to download the data, else the unit tests can't

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

El Dijous, 5 de febrer de 2015, a les 10:24:25, Corentin Desfarges va escriure: Are you sure that in build time do you need to download some data? is this acceptable? Leopold Yes I need to download the data, else the unit tests can't pass... And I can't include the data into the

Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Are you sure that in build time do you need to download some data? is this acceptable? Leopold Yes I need to download the data, else the unit tests can't pass... And I can't include the data into the package, because of its the size (more than 800MB). It has already been discussed in this

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Hi, On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:50:15AM +0100, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: By the way, we have to add wget as build-deps of the package in d/control. No, it's the lack of wget as build dependency. I'm trying to build again the package. I have made some modifications, but I would like

Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

I'm trying to build the fw4spl, in a pbuild environtment and I got this. [...] Any idea? Leopold Sorry, I've wasted your time. I forgot to push some lines in my CMakeLists.txt. But now the build work, with the commit : a15dbd90a83fe604950123f07e9c4ebf0e81de8b Thanks for your help,

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

El Dimecres, 4 de febrer de 2015, a les 17:23:04, Corentin Desfarges va escriure: I'm trying to build the fw4spl, in a pbuild environtment and I got this. [...] Any idea? Leopold Sorry, I've wasted your time. I forgot to push some lines in my CMakeLists.txt. But now the build work,

Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Hi Leopold, I'm trying to build the package. CMake fails. Needs to be called twice. This is not good. Please, try to patch cmakelist.txt to solve it. I fixed and pushed the changes. CMake shouldn't fail anymore. Thanks for your help! Corentin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

El Dimecres, 4 de febrer de 2015, a les 12:26:18, Corentin Desfarges va escriure: Hi Leopold, I'm trying to build the package. CMake fails. Needs to be called twice. This is not good. Please, try to patch cmakelist.txt to solve it. I fixed and pushed the changes. CMake shouldn't fail

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

statement. I think that in general, it's not accepted to install a public library outside this directories. The policies recommend that. We are discussing a private shared library. Technically you can do it. Put it, add your directory in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ rerun ldconfig

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Le 03/02/2015 10:53, Paul Wise a écrit : On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: corentin@debian:~$ ldd /usr/bin/fwLauncher libfwCore.so.0 = not found libfwRuntime.so.0 = not found ... corentin@debian:~$ objdump -x /usr/bin/fwLauncher | grep -i rpath

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

/usr/lib or /usr/lib/$ARCH in debian. Technically you can do it. Put it, add your directory in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ rerun ldconfig and it should run. However, you should have a very good reason, and ask to ftp-masters to let you do that [1]. Others distros have something similar, but maybe not so

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

in the packages that I have, I pass these options to cmake: override_dh_auto_configure: dh_auto_configure --\ -DLIB_INSTALL_DIR:STRING=lib/$(DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH)\ -DCMAKE_SKIP_RPATH=ON \ Leopold I've found

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: I'm not sure to know what log you asked me to check. I get this build log with sudo pdebuild -us -uc -nc : http://www.corentindesfarges.fr/buildlog.txt That is the log I am talking about. This appears to be the part where

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

El Dimarts, 3 de febrer de 2015, a les 20:29:30, Paul Wise va escriure: Leopold: we are talking about a private library here, rpath is what you set for private libraries. :-) thanks for the clarification Paul. Looking on the problem, there's a package: zathura, that has a private lib,

Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Sorry for the format of the last message. It's better like it : corentin@debian:~/dev1/fw4spl$ objdump -x /home/corentin/dev1/fw4spl/debian/fw4spl/usr/bin/fwLauncher | grep -i rpath corentin@debian:~/dev1/fw4spl$ objdump -x /home/corentin/dev1/fw4spl/debian/fw4spl/usr/bin/fwLauncher-0.1 |

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Le 03/02/2015 13:29, Paul Wise a écrit : On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: I'm not sure to know what log you asked me to check. I get this build log with sudo pdebuild -us -uc -nc : http://www.corentindesfarges.fr/buildlog.txt That is the log I am talking about.

Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: corentin@debian:~/dev1/fw4spl$ objdump -x /home/corentin/dev1/fw4spl/debian/fw4spl/usr/bin/fwLauncher | grep -i rpath corentin@debian:~/dev1/fw4spl$ objdump -x

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

El Dimarts, 3 de febrer de 2015, a les 22:22:07, Paul Wise va escriure: On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: corentin@debian:~/dev1/fw4spl$ objdump -x /home/corentin/dev1/fw4spl/debian/fw4spl/usr/bin/fwLauncher | grep -i rpath corentin@debian:~/dev1/fw4spl$

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

. Technically you can do it. Put it, add your directory in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ rerun ldconfig and it should run. This is an incorrect solution. Also, I don't think that the rpath could be a good solution [4]. That link contains Currently, the only generally accepted use of this feature in Debian

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 02:51:46PM +0100, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: Leopold: we are talking about a private library here, rpath is what you set for private libraries. :-) thanks for the clarification Paul. Looking on the problem, there's a package: zathura, that has a private

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

/ rerun ldconfig and it should run. This is an incorrect solution. Why? please could you be more elaborate? Also, I don't think that the rpath could be a good solution [4]. That link contains Currently, the only generally accepted use of this feature in Debian is to add non-standard library

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

El Dimarts, 3 de febrer de 2015, a les 17:02:02, Corentin Desfarges va escriure: in the packages that I have, I pass these options to cmake: override_dh_auto_configure: dh_auto_configure --\

Re: Re: Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: I'm sorry but this two commands don't work. I still get the same error when I run the second command (/usr/bin/fwLauncher) : What is the output of these commands? ls -l /usr/lib/fw4spl/libfwCore* file /usr/bin/fwLauncher

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Le 03/02/2015 10:42, Paul Wise a écrit : On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: I'm sorry but this two commands don't work. I still get the same error when I run the second command (/usr/bin/fwLauncher) : What is the output of these commands? ls -l

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: corentin@debian:~$ ldd /usr/bin/fwLauncher libfwCore.so.0 = not found libfwRuntime.so.0 = not found ... corentin@debian:~$ objdump -x /usr/bin/fwLauncher | grep -i rpath corentin@debian:~$ Looks like your binary does not

Re: Re: Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

This pair of commands will work: sudo debi /usr/bin/fwLauncher I'm sorry but this two commands don't work. I still get the same error when I run the second command (/usr/bin/fwLauncher) : fwLauncher: error while loading shared libraries: libfwCore.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No

Re: Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: I mean that I get the same error : ./debian/fw4spl/usr/bin/fwLauncher: error while loading shared libraries: libfwCore.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory This pair of commands will work: sudo debi

Re: Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

But it doesn't work. What does doesn't work mean? I mean that I get the same error : ./debian/fw4spl/usr/bin/fwLauncher: error while loading shared libraries: libfwCore.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Since it sounds like libfwCore.so.0 is supposed to be a private library so I think the correct solution here is for upstream to build the binary using an rpath rather than turning it into a public library placed in a different path. I've already try something like : export

Re: Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: I've already try something like : -Wl,-rpath=/usr/lib/fw4spl Is it something like it that you were talking by rpath ? Yes. But it doesn't work. What does doesn't work mean? -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Le 02/02/2015 14:17, Corentin Desfarges a écrit : But it doesn't work. What does doesn't work mean? I mean that I get the same error : ./debian/fw4spl/usr/bin/fwLauncher: error while loading shared libraries: libfwCore.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Hi, I'm still working on the packaging of fw4spl (a medical software) for the Debian-Med project [1], and I'm faced to an issue for a few days. I've this lintian warnings ; W: fw4spl: postinst-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig W: fw4spl: postrm-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig Are you 100% sure you

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

(To be clear, those are NOT the commands Lintian is complaining about. The allegedly useless calls to ldconfig were automatically generated by debhelper.) This is incorrect. You must not put anything to /etc/ld.so.conf.d/. This directory is reserved for glibc and for the system administrator

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Corentin Desfarges wrote: When I try to launch my software, I get this error : ./debian/fw4spl/usr/bin/fwLauncher: error while loading shared libraries: libfwCore.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory And by using echo

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

* Corentin Desfarges corentin.desfar...@gmail.com, 2015-01-23, 21:27: I'm still working on the packaging of fw4spl (a medical software) for the Debian-Med project [1], and I'm faced to an issue for a few days. I've this lintian warnings ; W: fw4spl: postinst-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig W

Re: Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 09:27:15PM +0100, Corentin Desfarges wrote: I'm still working on the packaging of fw4spl (a medical software) for the Debian-Med project [1], and I'm faced to an issue for a few days. I've this lintian warnings ; W: fw4spl: postinst-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig W

Useless call to ldconfig and shared libraries issue

Dear Mentors, I'm still working on the packaging of fw4spl (a medical software) for the Debian-Med project [1], and I'm faced to an issue for a few days. I've this lintian warnings ; W: fw4spl: postinst-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig W: fw4spl: postrm-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig and I don't

ldconfig message

Hi Can anybody explain the meaning of the following message issued at time of running: dpkg -i : ldconfig deferred processing now taking place /sbin/ldconfig.real: libraries libvirt.so.0.4.4 and libvirtm.so in directory /usr/lib have same soname but different type. /sbin/ldconfig.real

ldconfig symlink issue

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I apologize for this question, as it's probably easy to answer for someone experienced in packaging libraries. When packaging a shared library, I can't seem to create the symlinks correctly. If I let the Makefile create the symlinks I get ldconfig

Re: ldconfig symlink issue

the symlinks correctly. If I let the Makefile create the symlinks I get ldconfig-symlink-is-not-a-symlink, however if I remove the lines that make the symlinks I get ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib from lintian. Again, I apologize for this being a noob question. A library package should

ldconfig

My understanding is that ldconfig does 2 things: 1. Create symbolic links /usr/lib/foo.so.n is made a link to the most recent library whose soname is foo.so.n; nothing happens if this is already true. 2. Update the cache file /etc/ld.so.cache If a library is needed (eg

Re: ldconfig

Justin Pryzby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My understanding is that ldconfig does 2 things: 1. Create symbolic links /usr/lib/foo.so.n is made a link to the most recent library whose soname is foo.so.n; nothing happens if this is already true. 2. Update the cache file /etc

Re: ldconfig

On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 06:13:49PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: The reason why the link should be included is so that the library can already be used between unpacking and configuring (running ldconfig) the package. And because if ldconfig creates the link, it isn't owned by the package

Re: ldconfig

Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 06:13:49PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: The reason why the link should be included is so that the library can already be used between unpacking and configuring (running ldconfig) the package. And because if ldconfig creates

Re: ldconfig

and configuring (running ldconfig) the package. And because if ldconfig creates the link, it isn't owned by the package and can't be removed when the package is removed. That would clutter the system, making piuparts angry. (Actually, it might miss it. But it's the kind of stuff it checks

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 01:25:24AM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: I am trying to package fortranposix library. I produced some debian packages but I am not satisfied with their quality. For example, when I do $lintian -i libfortranposix0_0.1-1_i386.deb E: libfortranposix0: ldconfig

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:25 -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: I am trying to package fortranposix library. I produced some debian packages but I am not satisfied with their quality. For example, when I do $lintian -i libfortranposix0_0.1-1_i386.deb E: libfortranposix0: ldconfig-symlink

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:53 -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: section 8.1 of debian-policy states that [sic]The run-time library package should include the symbolic link that |ldconfig| would create for the shared libraries. [sic] Does not this mean that ldconfig creates the symbolic

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

: libfortranposix0: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib usr/lib/libfortranposix.so.0 usr/lib/libfortranposix.so.0.0.0 libfortranposix.so.0 N: N: The package should not only include the shared library itself, but N: also the symbolic link which ldconfig would produce. (This is N: necessary, so

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

skaller wrote: On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:53 -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: section 8.1 of debian-policy states that [sic]The run-time library package should include the symbolic link that |ldconfig| would create for the shared libraries. [sic] Does not this mean that ldconfig creates

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

that comes close is the following paragraph. The run-time library package should include the symbolic link that ^^ |ldconfig| would create for the shared libraries. ^ I'm sorry, I

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

Philipp Kern wrote: On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:53 -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: section 8.1 of debian-policy states that [sic]The run-time library package should include the symbolic link that |ldconfig| would create for the shared libraries. [sic] Does not this mean that ldconfig

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

sentences quoted from the debian-ploicy here. Quoting from http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html#s-sharedlibs-runtime 8.1 Run-time shared libraries [snip] The run-time library package should include the symbolic link that ldconfig would create for the shared libraries

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

. The run-time library package should include the symbolic link that ^^ |ldconfig| would create for the shared libraries. ^ I'm sorry, I don't see any way that Policy could

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

. The run-time library package should include the symbolic link that |ldconfig| would create for the shared libraries. I think that the policy seems to speak pretty plain english here. Let me underline the relevant words again: The run-time library package should include the symbolic

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 05:17:12AM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: One possible alteration would be (with minimal changes to the original text) The run-time library package should include the symbolic link to the shared libraries that| |would have normally been created by ldconfig. I

ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

I am trying to package fortranposix library. I produced some debian packages but I am not satisfied with their quality. For example, when I do $lintian -i libfortranposix0_0.1-1_i386.deb E: libfortranposix0: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib usr/lib/libfortranposix.so.0 usr/lib

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib usr/lib/libfortranposix.so.0 usr/lib/libfortranposix.so.0.0.0 libfortranposix.so.0 N: N: The package should not only include the shared library itself, but N: also the symbolic link which ldconfig would produce. (This is N: necessary, so that the link gets

Re: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib error

On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:53 -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: section 8.1 of debian-policy states that [sic]The run-time library package should include the symbolic link that |ldconfig| would create for the shared libraries. [sic] Does not this mean that ldconfig creates the symbolic link

Erroneous postrm-unsafe-ldconfig?

Hi, lintian gives the following complaint about the libgrass package: W: libgrass: postrm-unsafe-ldconfig The postrm is below and it looks to me like ldconfig will only be called when the first argument is remove. Am I missing something? Should I file a bug against lintian? Thanks, Steve

Re: Erroneous postrm-unsafe-ldconfig?

Hi, On Tue, Feb 22, 2005, Steve Halasz wrote: lintian gives the following complaint about the libgrass package: W: libgrass: postrm-unsafe-ldconfig The postrm is below and it looks to me like ldconfig will only be called when the first argument is remove. Am I missing something

Re: Lintian complaining about ldconfig in postrm-remove

On Sun, Aug 24, 2003 at 06:32:14PM +0200, Dominik Stadler wrote: W: atleto: postrm-unsafe-ldconfig N: N: The postrm script calls ldconfig unsafely. The postrm must only call N: ldconfig when given the argument remove. N: N: Refer to Policy Manual, section 9.1.1 for details. N

Lintian complaining about ldconfig in postrm-remove

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 When running lintian, I always get the following warning: W: atleto: postrm-unsafe-ldconfig N: N: The postrm script calls ldconfig unsafely. The postrm must only call N: ldconfig when given the argument remove. N: N: Refer to Policy Manual

Re: Lintian complaining about ldconfig in postrm-remove

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dominik Stadler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When running lintian, I always get the following warning: W: atleto: postrm-unsafe-ldconfig N: N: The postrm script calls ldconfig unsafely. The postrm must only call N: ldconfig when given

Lintian complaining about ldconfig in postrm-remove

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 When running lintian, I always get the following warning: W: atleto: postrm-unsafe-ldconfig N: N: The postrm script calls ldconfig unsafely. The postrm must only call N: ldconfig when given the argument remove. N: N: Refer to Policy Manual

Re: Lintian complaining about ldconfig in postrm-remove

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dominik Stadler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When running lintian, I always get the following warning: W: atleto: postrm-unsafe-ldconfig N: N: The postrm script calls ldconfig unsafely. The postrm must only call N: ldconfig when given

Re: Lintian complaining about ldconfig in postrm-remove

On Sun, Aug 24, 2003 at 06:32:14PM +0200, Dominik Stadler wrote: W: atleto: postrm-unsafe-ldconfig N: N: The postrm script calls ldconfig unsafely. The postrm must only call N: ldconfig when given the argument remove. N: N: Refer to Policy Manual, section 9.1.1 for details. N

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:17:36AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint.

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

Should we ask Craig Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] to sync those .ex files with Lintian ? actually he should sync them with debhelper. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:17:36AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint.

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

Should we ask Craig Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] to sync those .ex files with Lintian ? actually he should sync them with debhelper.

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 10:56:25AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 04:00:34PM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: case $1 in configure) ldconfig

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:17:36AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it. Write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or file a bug against it. -- Christian Surchi |

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 08:18:20PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: On 01-Nov-2001 Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: Lintian is a collection of stupid shell scripts. It tries to catch thr common

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 10:56:25AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 04:00:34PM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: case $1 in configure) ldconfig

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it.

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:17:36AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it. Write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or file a bug against it. -- Christian Surchi |

place of ldconfig in postinst

Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: case $1 in configure) ldconfig ;; abort-upgrade|abort-remove|abort-deconfigure) ;; *) echo postinst called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 Still lintian complains about

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

case $1 in configure) ldconfig W: iiwusynth: postinst-unsafe-ldconfig Sorry, I don't get it ! Lintian is cannot parse shell scripts, it checks for some common variants, and warns if your version didn't match what it expected. Since you do the right thing, just ignore

Re: place of ldconfig in postinst

On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 04:13:36PM +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote: case $1 in configure) ldconfig W: iiwusynth: postinst-unsafe-ldconfig Sorry, I don't get it ! Lintian is cannot parse shell scripts, it checks for some common variants, and warns if your version didn't

  1   2   >