On Sun, 4 May 2025 01:42:24 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> The update to magma 2.9.0 that landed in rawhide a few hours ago
> bumped the soname for libmagma.so (from `libmagma.so.2.8.0()(64bit)`
> to `libmagma.so.2.9.0()(64bit)`) which was not announced or
> coordinated with dependent packages.
Please revise the spec file with some added safety measures.
As convenient as it may be to include ANY shared lib regardless of its
version number, doing that is exactly what causes dependency breakage
most often.
Also, apparently the spec file would happily ignore missing files
because of how it populates the %files list. Strangely, it does that
although there are only two libs in the package, and no symlink for the
major version is being used:
$ rpmls magma|grep libm
-rwxr-xr-x /usr/lib64/libmagma.so.2.8.0
-rwxr-xr-x /usr/lib64/libmagma_sparse.so.2.8.0
| %install
| %cmake_install
|
| echo s@%{buildroot}@@ > br.sed
| find %{buildroot}%{_libdir} -name '*.so.*.[0-9]' | sed -f br.sed >
%{name}.files | find %{buildroot}%{_libdir} -name '*.so.[0-9]' | sed
-f br.sed >> %{name}.files | find %{buildroot}%{_libdir} -name '*.so'
| sed -f br.sed > %{name}.devel
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
