[fpc-pascal] Re: linux: should we hard-code versioned or unversioned shared libraries in our apps?

Reinier Olislagers reinierolislagers at gmail.com
Wed Aug 15 14:45:26 CEST 2012

On 15-8-2012 13:49, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> On 15 Aug 2012, at 13:32, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
>> On 15 August 2012 12:10, Jonas Maebe <jonas.maebe-3RqwKoEL1alVsUKGZV2E3Q at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>> The official way to get the unversioned symbolic links is to install the -dev or
>>> -devel package for that library. Of course, you're not supposed to require
>>> end-users to do that.
>> Yes, I know that bit, but even as a developer, if I don't do actual
>> Firebird or OpenSSL development (I don't work on those project, I
>> simply use there libraries), I don't need to install those libraries.
> The dev/devel packages are not for people working on those libraries, they are for building programs that use those libraries. It's developers that do work on those packages themselves that don't necessarily need those packages, since they can just use their own source code.
>> That is why my Ubuntu and OpenSUSE system didn't have the -devel
>> packages for them installed. FCL-db and Synapse dynamically load those
>> libraries on my development machines, so no -devel package
>> requirement.
> You said that you manually created the symbolic link. I simply explained that you should never do that, and instead install the development packages because they will do that (correctly) for you. Whether or not it is desirable for the FCL/Synapse units to require an unversioned symlink to be present is a separate issue.
In other words, you'd have to add the relevant -dev/-devel packages as
dependencies in your .deb or .rpm package, right?

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list