On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 08:13:23PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 07:39:59PM +0100, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> >
> > I am wondering, though, why proftpd ships its own copy of libltdl instead
> > of
> > using the system version, which would avoid this kind of bugs to be have to
> > be
> > fixed in proftpd at all.
> >
>
> This is completely another problem. Indeed it would be better patching
> in order to use the system library instead of statically linking a local
> copy. I suspect it is due to the need to have in sync liblt and the
> local libtool stuff, to avoid breakages from time to time when
> system libtool is updated. What I see is that this is a quite common
> choice by upstreams...
It's my understanding that libltdl is intended to be embedded in
applications by upstream libtool. However, package in Debian
should almost always link to the shared version provided in the
libltdl package. It's my understanding that build-depeding on
libltdl-dev should be enough for that in most cases, but the
packages using the local version are probably configured to do so.
The documentation has this to say about it:
If the `--with-included-ltdl' is not passed at configure time, and
an installed `libltdl' is not found(2), then `configure' will exit
immediately with an error that asks the user to either specify the
location of an installed `libltdl' using the `--with-ltdl-include'
and `--with-ltdl-lib' options, or to build with the `libltdl'
sources shipped with the package by passing `--with-included-ltdl'.
Kurt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
