-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 05 February 2004 12:20, Marius Mauch wrote: > X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.8claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 11:20:42 +0100 > > Spider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So my question was for the generic case of things like this, Can > > the binaries be made more reliable? > > > > Perhaps this sort of thing be worked around in portage-code? ( wrap > > a consistency check of linking before installing? demand that a > > system is"updated" ? ) > > > > Or should binaries have more metadata in them, perhaps a specific > > requirement for libraries? (sheesh, then its down to RPM again. > > that's bad. ) > > Why more metadata? Can't we just run a ldd check on the binaries, > check that the relevant libraries are present, if not do a lookup in a > (to-be-created) list of library<->package mappings and add the > relevant packages as PDEPEND? (or yell at the user to provide that > library ;)
Partly because first of all whe then would unpack those libs and do some magic to take local libs into account. Further the mappings is exactly the thing that redhat does that we cannot do easilly (which we probably don't want either). Paul - -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAIiijbKx5DBjWFdsRAv7/AKCyu7NaqkCbJijnFyEGANtqLPQCFQCfZ8DZ s8PeQUx1nOkCU++R57bCyUE= =3la3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
