Hi, I recently uploaded courierpassd, which wraps some functionality of courier-authlib in the popassd protocol. lintian has been warning me about the use of rpath, about which I posted on debian-mentors. This culminated in the following thread:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2006/07/msg00221.html
Which along with several other related comments motivated me to open bug
#378241, asking courier-authlib to move its public libraries to
/usr/lib, per Policy 10.2, which would remove the necessity of
courierpassd using rpath.
Steve Langasek followed up with the bug, wisely decreasing its
severety and stating:
"I think that suggestion in policy is worse than using rpath and that
this ought to be revised."
With that extended background, here are my two specific requests:
1) It would be really nice if policy said something about rpath.
Currently the most official documentation about it which I could
find is:
http://wiki.debian.org/RpathIssue
If rpath is going to be checked for by lintian, then it seems
reasonable to me that there be some official documentation
explaining Debian's position on the matter. I've currently asked
for this in lintian's bug #378054, but perhaps there should be a
parallel bug in debian-policy or elsewhere?
2) It would be nice to have some further discussion on Steve's comment
regarding the relative merit of using rpath and /usr/lib/<package>
versus moving all shared libraries into /usr/lib. I opened bug
#378055 in lintian about this, but given the developments which
have taken place since then, it is no longer clear to me what the
right thing is for lintian to do. Again, I think that
clarification on this is in policy's domain.
thanks,
Charles
--
A beard
That's rough
And overgrown
is better than
A chaperone
Burma-Shave
http://burma-shave.org/jingles/1951/a_beard
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
