https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326504
--- Comment #24 from Jun Aruga <[email protected]> --- Hi Dave, > I defined `%global so_version 0.1` to use it like libhts.so.0.1 > I also opened the ticket to ask it on upstream. > https://github.com/samtools/htslib/issues/932 I got a great feedback from a person in the upstream on the ticket. The htslib's so version rule is following Fedora's glibc's rule. So, can we use the built so files without changing so version, can't we? If you like, I will revert my modification for %make_build and %make_install line. ``` $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libc-2.29.so glibc-2.29-15.fc30.x86_64 $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libc.so.6 glibc-2.29-15.fc30.x86_64 $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libc.so glibc-devel-2.29-15.fc30.x86_64 $ ls -l /usr/lib64/libc[-.]* -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 6699224 Jun 6 14:09 /usr/lib64/libc-2.29.so* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 16258354 Jun 6 14:10 /usr/lib64/libc.a -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 253 Jun 6 13:55 /usr/lib64/libc.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Jun 6 13:55 /usr/lib64/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.29.so* ``` -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
