Re: amendment to shared library policy

2003-05-19 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Sun, 18 May 2003 20:05:53 -0400 (EDT), Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Yes, I guess it would be lintian, however I am under the > impression that developers have to setup up their builds to use > lintian (that is the output isn't automatically generated and mailed > back to them)

Re: amendment to shared library policy

2003-05-19 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 09:04:23PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 04:26:35PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: > > > Looking at the number of shared libraries in Debian which prelink > > > has revealed to have undefined non-weak symbols (through incorrect > > > linkage), I th

Re: amendment to shared library policy

2003-05-18 Thread Jack Howarth
Steve, Well I think you may need to use a combination of tools to get all the information. It seems to me that 'ldd -d -r' is the simpliest to use (since many folks don't like or trust prelink yet) to find the undefined symbols. So for example you might find... ldd -d -r ./libgmodule-1.2.so.0

Re: amendment to shared library policy

2003-05-18 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 07:43:30PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hello, > > On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 04:26:35PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: > > Looking at the number of shared libraries in Debian which prelink > > has revealed to have undefined non-weak symbols (through incorrect > > linkage), I th

Re: amendment to shared library policy

2003-05-18 Thread Steve Langasek
Hello, On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 04:26:35PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: > Looking at the number of shared libraries in Debian which prelink > has revealed to have undefined non-weak symbols (through incorrect > linkage), I think we need an amendment to clarify Debian policy on > such symbols. In a nu

Re: amendment to shared library policy

2003-05-18 Thread Jack Howarth
Joey, Yes, I guess it would be lintian, however I am under the impression that developers have to setup up their builds to use lintian (that is the output isn't automatically generated and mailed back to them). It would seem that we really should be stricter than making sanity checking shared l

Re: amendment to shared library policy

2003-05-18 Thread Joey Hess
Jack Howarth wrote: > dh_shlibdeps should be performing a 'ldd -d -r' > on each library in a package and issuing a warning if undefined > symbols are detected. The warning issued by dh_shlibdeps should be > simply that "Additional linkage *may* be required for this shared > library". You must me

amendment to shared library policy

2003-05-18 Thread Jack Howarth
Looking at the number of shared libraries in Debian which prelink has revealed to have undefined non-weak symbols (through incorrect linkage), I think we need an amendment to clarify Debian policy on such symbols. In a nut-shell, the policy should be that "No shared library shall contain undefined