Jonathan Craig <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Philip Brown <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:25 PM, Ben Walton <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> My preference, as the whole point of this proposal is to have more >>> libraries available in /opt/csw/lib, is to prefer the files to be >>> placed in /opt/csw/lib and the symlinks (if any) to be in >>> /opt/csw/special/lib/. >>> >>> Does anyone think this should be the opposite by default? >> >> yes. I've already written this, AND I've already written why. >> Because that is the "normal" way that programs install things, when >> you compile with >> configure --prefix=/opt/csw/prefix >> >> That is the "normal" location ,therefore that should be the "real" location. >> This is consistent with standard behaviour. For example, >> /usr/openwin/lib. that is/was the "real" location of the libX11 >> libraries, but for convenience, symlinks were made from other >> locations pointing to there. >> We are in the same situation. We basically want a reference in >> /opt/csw/lib, for convenience. >> > > I concur. Libraries should be placed in their package specific > subdirectory as the package install would have it. For convenience, a > symlink from our global library directory (/opt/cw/lib) should be made > to the actual file. > > The primary reason being that this allows easier integration of > multiple versions. If you reverse this and force the actual library > into /opt/csw/lib then you will have to move this library to its > package/versioned subdirectory before overwriting. This would be a > logistical nightmare. > > As to libraries with SONAME collisions I don't know whether its better > to not create any symlinks or always create symlinks to the newest > version (or possibly last installed). Its a coin toss between > problems finding libraries during builds and the possibility that > you'll break an existing application by installing a newer version of > the library. Having said that, I guess I would lean towards > operational stability and not create any symlinks.
What about stating that a symbolic link *should* be made in a sense or another if the need arise but, as it implies, is not mandatory. -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
