>>>>> On Thu, 11 Aug 2016, James Le Cuirot wrote: >> Have you asked Debian why they are doing that?
> I did find out but had since forgotten. Here it is: > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=380725#10 So they are aware of the issue since 10 years, but chose not to fix it? Seriously, there's no good reason to dance to their tune then. >> This looks like a bad hack. As you said above, it will confuse >> ldconfig, unless some trickery with /lib vs /usr/lib is used. > I wouldn't call it trickery. Here's what happens when you put it > in /lib. I can't see anything wrong here? > # cd /lib > # ls -l libpcre.* > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Jul 12 23:29 libpcre.so.1 -> libpcre.so.1.2.7 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 464960 Jul 12 23:29 libpcre.so.1.2.7 > # ln -s libpcre.so.1 libpcre.so.3 > # ls -l libpcre.* > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Jul 12 23:29 libpcre.so.1 -> libpcre.so.1.2.7 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 464960 Jul 12 23:29 libpcre.so.1.2.7 > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Aug 11 11:01 libpcre.so.3 -> libpcre.so.1 > # ldconfig > # ls -l libpcre.* > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Jul 12 23:29 libpcre.so.1 -> libpcre.so.1.2.7 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 464960 Jul 12 23:29 libpcre.so.1.2.7 > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Aug 11 11:01 libpcre.so.3 -> libpcre.so.1 >> IMHO providing compatibility symlinks for proprietary binary-only >> programs isn't the task of the libpcre package. > I'm fine with putting it in libpcre-debian package as kentnl > suggested. I still think that the libpcre.so.3 compatibility link shouldn't be installed in a generally visible location. Install it in a specific directory instead, and start your binary with a wrapper which will add that directory to LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Ulrich
pgp7FkboIU_id.pgp
Description: PGP signature
