GNU bug report logs -
#30006
bzip2 does not provide libbz2.so
Previous Next
Reported by: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 13:30:02 UTC
Severity: normal
Done: Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
Marius, Mark,
On 2018-03-23 21:50, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr> writes:
>
>> On 2018-03-23 13:02, Marius Bakke wrote:
>>> diff --git a/gnu/packages/compression.scm
>>> b/gnu/packages/compression.scm
>>> index b158feac4..fd111e579 100644
>>> --- a/gnu/packages/compression.scm
>>> +++ b/gnu/packages/compression.scm
>>> @@ -272,6 +272,9 @@ file; as a result, it is often used in
>>> conjunction with \"tar\", resulting in
>>> (lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys)
>>> (let* ((out (assoc-ref outputs "out"))
>>> (libdir (string-append out "/lib")))
>>> + ;; The Make target above does not create "libbz2.so",
>>> only
>>> + ;; the versioned libs, so we have to create it
>>> ourselves.
>>> + (symlink "libbz2.so.1.0" "libbz2.so")
>>
>> How about symlinking to (string-append ... version) directly?
>> Seems more robust & worked fine when I tried it, I think.™
>
> In general, the version numbers at the end of shared library names like
> "libbz2.so.1.0" do not necessarily match the version number of the
> corresponding source release. Therefore, I don't think we should write
> code that assumes that those two versions will coincide.
Do note that I'm not suggesting doing so in general; just in the case of
bzip2 where that rule does historically hold. If that ever changes, so
will the ‘1.0’ assumption.
(I did substitute ‘version’ for the ‘version-major+minor’ I actually
used for... simplicity, I guess, which was probably ill advised.)
> However, I agree that it would be better not to hardcode the "1.0". I
> would suggest using 'find-files' to find the versioned shared library,
> and to verify that there is exactly one match. (ice-9 match) provides
> an elegant way to check for a singleton list while matching its
> element.
I wasn't aware of such an elegant possibility. A perfect fit IMO :-)
Thanks,
T G-R
Sent from a Web browser. Excuse or enjoy my brevity.
This bug report was last modified 7 years and 116 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.