[pkg-synfig-devel] Re: Bug#358242: synfig modules not found.

[Paul Wise]

[talking about http://bugs.debian.org/358242]

On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 20:38 +0200, Fabian Fagerholm wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 16:40 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > Any ideas about how to fix this? Moving the symlinks into the library
> > package violates policy IIRC. I suppose we would have to make it look
> > for the proper sonames?
> 
> Yes, that seems to be right. The big question is what "it" is in this
> case. Some quick analysis:
> 
> src/synfig/module.cpp seems to be the place where those .so's are being
> dlopen()ed. More specifically, lines 116 and 117 in that file calls
> libltdl's lt_dlopenext() function, trying two different names for
> the .so's: one with a "lib" prefix, one without.
> 
> I tried finding out how libltdl chooses the name. This is how it works:
> if the specified filename can be found, it is used. Else, if there is
> a .la file available in the search path, it is used to find the library.
> Otherwise, libltdl will open <library>.so. If that doesn't succeed, it
> fails.
> 
> An approach would be to figure out the soversion of the library at
> build-time and use a macro (or equivalent) in the code to try opening
> the library with the soname in the filename. But this might be a very
> stupid idea -- I don't know enough about this to be able to tell.
> Perhaps upstream has enough knowledge to comment?

CCing this message to the upstream dev list. I'm inclined to just ship
the .so symlinks in the library package, since these plugins are only
accessed by libsynfig, not sure if that is against policy tho.

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-synfig-devel/attachments/20060323/384adca5/attachment.pgp