Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 4 Mar 2003 16:22:55 -0800
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Will Andrews <will@csociety.org>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Installing unnecessary files (Re: pkg-plist question)
Message-ID:  <20030305002254.GC94004@rot13.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <20030304214524.GN37397@procyon.firepipe.net>
References:  <008601c2e26b$0c493ea0$2136fb93@kloboucek> <006b01c2e27a$261eb7b0$19fd2fd8@westbend.net> <20030304184628.GJ37397@procyon.firepipe.net> <20030304213652.GB93311@rot13.obsecurity.org> <20030304214524.GN37397@procyon.firepipe.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--NU0Ex4SbNnrxsi6C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 01:45:24PM -0800, Will Andrews wrote:

> Just because something is useless on FreeBSD (an unqualified
> assertion in my view) doesn't mean it's not useful anywhere else.

If you're disputing the assertion that .so.x.y libraries are useless
on FreeBSD, then can you please provide a counterexample or explain
how the .so.x.y library is useful on FreeBSD?

> Developers use the name to store a longer version number and look
> for the filenames (which is a very cheap approach to detecting
> the lib).  Not installing them on FreeBSD forces 3rd party
> developers to use special cases for FreeBSD.=20

Not really..at worst it means an extra (simple) patch to the port.

> This is just another example of rules we made up 3-4 years ago for a
> reason that is now outdated.

*This* is an unqualified assertion.  Why is it outdated?  Pre-ELF
=2Eso.x.y libraries were used and had to be installed; post-ELF they
were not used.

> Whether or not rtld looks at files named *.so.x.* is irrelevant.
> No rtld that exists looks at them (that I'm aware of) and every
> 3rd-party lib installs *.so symlinks (or the other way around).
> This isn't a library issue (as it used to be), it is merely
> whether or not a file/symlink should be installed.

I don't like useless files to be installed on my system (whether they
are unused .la files, unused .so.x.y files or symlinks, extra GNU
COPYING instances, support files for non-freebsd platforms, .orig
patch droppings, etc).

  Wherever possible, the port should not install unnecessary
  (non-used) files.

If you disagree with this statement, please explain why.

Kris

--NU0Ex4SbNnrxsi6C
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE+ZUNeWry0BWjoQKURAv+bAJ9RqPRD/M7R3QU4NGTpMiHqf03GowCfT8wx
OUo3Bpm0ADOIE1c1s+kTI1Q=
=CZ6w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--NU0Ex4SbNnrxsi6C--

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030305002254.GC94004>