/lib symlinks problem?

[Ruslan Ermilov]

On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 10:10:49PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 05:52:24PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > > I might be missing an obvious, but I just don't see a reason
> > > > why we should use relative linking here: we should just link
> > > > to where we really install.  With the attached patch, I get:
> ...
> > +.if ${LIBDIR} != ${SHLIBDIR}
> > +	ln -fs ${SHLIBDIR}/${SHLIB_NAME} ${DESTDIR}${LIBDIR}/${SHLIB_LINK}
> 
> Why are we making *any* symlinks here??
> 
: revision 1.150
: date: 2003/08/17 23:56:29;  author: gordon;  state: Exp;  lines: +2 -3
: When creating .so symlinks, use SHLIBDIR instead of LIBDIR so symlinks
: are created in the correct location. Always make them. For libraries
: that live in /lib, this causes a /lib/libfoo.so and a compatibility
: /usr/lib/libfoo.so to be created. We may want to drop the
: /usr/lib/libfoo.so symlink at some future point.

I think that Gordon took a safe path with creating compatibility symlinks.
Besides, creating compatibility symlinks has a nicety of removing your
stale symlinks in /usr/lib.


Cheers,
-- 
Ruslan Ermilov		Sysadmin and DBA,
ru at sunbay.com		Sunbay Software Ltd,
ru at FreeBSD.org		FreeBSD committer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20030901/de539173/attachment.bin