Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 17:00:02 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: python@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 227939] devel/boost-python-libs vs ctypes.util.find_library Message-ID: <bug-227939-21822-D6Lb2Cla7g@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-227939-21822@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-227939-21822@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D227939 --- Comment #9 from Wiktor Niesiobedzki <bsd@vink.pl> --- (In reply to Jan Beich from comment #6) > For one, find_library() works fine on CentOS 7 without .so.X.Y.Z -> .so.X= symlink. Probably because find_library has another strategy available on Linux - invoking gcc in trace mode and extracting library path from there. Maybe it's the way to go to implement the same behaviour for FreeBSD (though use clang instead of gcc). For libraries that do not provide ABI compatibility, either they need to install .so.XYZ link to satisfy ldconfig requirements or ldconfig needs to = be fixed to look for so.X.Y.Z. Security note in ldconfig(8) man page specifies that library is missing from hints file it will not be loaded by setuid bin= ary. So if I'll have setuid binary linked with boost-python it will fail to run,= as the linker will refuse to load boost-python as non-safe lib? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-227939-21822-D6Lb2Cla7g>