Orbit - Package Manager - Specification/ideas

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2011-07-19 12:33, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> Seems like rpath could indeed work in this case. I can't find much
> documentation about it though. Debian recommends not to use it:
> http://wiki.debian.org/RpathIssue but I'm not sure if this problem
> applies to orbit.

Won't the same problem occur if rpath isn't used? With LD_LIBRARY_PATH 
for example.

> I'd prefer installing shared libraries system wide though. The
> soname/version approach is not that bad. Your proposed package
> versioning scheme could even be mapped 1:1 to the soname versions. Or
> we could use libtools versioning scheme, which is similar, ('major' and
> 'minor' are one field, 'build' stays the same, and an additional 'age'
> field is added)
> http://sourceware.org/autobook/autobook/autobook_91.html

I don't want to install the libraries system wide. Again your assuming 
Linux only. It has to work on all supported platforms. At least: Linux, 
Mac OS X and Windows.

> Having read more about it, i think I have to correct my previous
> statement: It is possible to link to specific versions with the soname
> approach. It's maybe a little more limited (You can't say: "I want to
> use libfoo.so.1.2.0", You can only say: "I want to use libfoo 1.x.x",
> and the linker could end up using 1.1.0, 1.2.0 ...) but it seems this
> should be good enough.

No, I want to be able to use an exact version.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg