[yocto] .rpm packaging weirdness of dynamic libraries

[Burton, Ross]

On 23 May 2013 16:25, Hans Beckérus <hans.beckerus at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, yes and no ;) If I look in /lib there are plenty of libraries
> that comes with .so files so it seems they are needed in some cases,
> right? Also, since part of our system software is doing loading of
> dynamic libraries themselves using dlopen() it is *very* hard to
> enforce removal of .so files since that piece of software does not
> know what particular version of the library it should use. It should
> load whatever .so points to, most commonly the latest version. So, is
> there some way for us to make sure .so files are also part of the
> .rpm? we do not wish to install the -dev variant since it also
> pollutes the system with a lot of other not needed stuff. Since /lib
> is having a lot of of .so files it must be possible, or?
> Actually, I have never seen a system that does not include also the
> .so files? Not even embedded ones. They are only soft links so
> flash/ram/disk space is not really an issue here.

*Every* mainstream linux distribution will not ship .so symlinks
unless you've installed the development files, or they are needed for
some reason (generally, the .so won't be a symlink in that case).  If
a particular library is designed to be unversioned and dlopen'd using
a .so filename, then change the FILES as appropriate.  If your package
is dlopening arbitrary versioned libraries though libfoo.so filenames
then you can either do more work and find the real name, or mess
around with the packaging yourself.

Ross