On 11/08/16 03:56 PM, James Le Cuirot wrote: > On Thu, 11 Aug 2016 11:05:00 -0400 > Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> On 11/08/16 10:57 AM, Mart Raudsepp wrote: >>> Ühel kenal päeval, N, 11.08.2016 kell 12:56, kirjutas Ulrich >>> Mueller: >>>>>>>>> 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. >>> >>> It's not to dance to Debians tune, it's to dance to Valve tunes, >>> which happens to create its runtimes from Ubuntu packages. >>> I strongly believe that it's important to have such a use case as >>> Steam work problem-free in Gentoo. It's currently too messy, with >>> and without using steam runtime. >>> In the former case (using steam runtime), there are >>> incompatibilities between libraries found in the steam runtime, and >>> those that it doesn't include and assumes the system provides >>> (primarily mesa and deps); each steam runtime version you get to >>> hack around things by removing a small selection of libraries from >>> the steam runtime dir to get stuff working; a 1-2 month old upgrade >>> I haven't even managed to get to work yet on a more up to date >>> machine. In the latter case (forcing to not use steam runtime), >>> it's near impossible right now to get a set of 32bit binaries to >>> satisfy even steam client itself without lots of trial and error, >>> let alone some 32bit game. >>> >>>>> 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. >>> >>> Isn't this a use case for ldscripts, e.g like gen_usr_ldscript >>> toolchain.eclass function does, except for pointing libpcre.so.3 to >>> libpcre.so.1 (so can't use that eclass function, but could just pre- >>> create one to $FILESDIR if it works)? >>> The important points should be: >>> 1) No compilation/linking done on Gentoo should possibly end up with >>> putting libpcre.so.3 in its DT_NEEDED >>> 2) libpcre.so should link to libpcre.so.1 >>> >>> If we can satisfy these, I don't see a reason to mess around with >>> some extra package. >>> Debian reasoning of having stuck with libpcre.so.3 historically is >>> sound as well, especially if upstream will never use that, given >>> libpcre2.so.x or however they soname pcre2-10+. Also, given PCRE2, >>> and given debians todays situation with this, I would also >>> technically choose not to change this, as things should migrate >>> over to PCRE2. >>> >>> Mart >> >> Wouldn't the most simple solution here would be to make a symlink for >> libpcre.so.3 within the local bindir for each Valve or whatever >> package that needs it? This is a binary-package-supporting hack, >> might as well do it in the binary packages that need it. You might >> still need to wrap the binary to set some environment stuff, not sure; >> either way it doesn't seem to make sense to make this a system-wide >> thing. > > We don't package Steam itself and doing so isn't viable. We package > upstream's script for bootstrapping it under the user's HOME. As such, > there is nowhere to create such a symlink. It's not actually Steam > itself that requires libpcre.so.3 but (at least) one of its games. You > similarly can't create a symlink for each game because they also get > installed under HOME or some other user-defined location. > > I have summed up the feedback. I have also considered that we don't > install the likes of libpng12.so.0 to a different location, even though > this is also there solely to satisfy pre-compiled binaries. We don't > even have a separate package for that though I will gladly compromise > on that point in this case. With all that in mind, I am going to > install to /lib using a libpcre-debian package. Sorry if you disagree > but since when do we all agree on anything? :) > > Regards, >
The non-zero slotted libpng is different -- this is a compiled libpng library that is provided to support binary packages as it the api and abi has changed in newer ones. A symlink of an identical library to address a -name- change is totally different imo. That said, I understand based on what's been described above how this would be more easily handled at the system level rather than at an individual package level (though I expect I would personally still patch the upstream bootstrap script instead) Installing the script to /lib though does not seem like the right way to handle this; i know it works, but realistically this should be installed to /usr/$(get_libdir)/debiancompat/ or similar, and if you still don't want to wrap the apps that need it then also install an /etc/env.d/ file to add this dir to the LDPATH.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
