This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: RPM and shared library support
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 10:19:51AM -0400, Nicholas Wourms wrote:
> I've already done it (modified the 4.1/4.2 builds to use external shared
> libraries). The plan is to add rpm's enhancements to each of those
> packages. The only thing we need to do is convince CGF to merge the
> zlib patches, which I see as "harmless" additions anyhow, and we should
> be set. There is no reason to distribute redundant dlls, especially
> since it sort of contridicts the point of using dll's in the first place.
Just curious, what needs to be done about the --with-uniquename
configure option passed to BerkeleyDB by the RPM configuration? Can RPM
(both programs and development libraries) be linked against the standard
> I've already had one-on-one conversations with Jeff Johnson, and he's
> filled me in on the nitty-gritty. As I stated before, there's no rush
> and I think we can get shared lib support in the next version of rpm.
Well, I don't mean to *rush* you, but I really want to generate a
rpm-devel-4.1 package ASAP. How long will it be before the new rpm-4.2
can be released? I'm very eager to get RPM 4.1 development libraries
done for my own purposes.
If you think it might take you awhile, maybe I can take a stab at
getting rpm-devel-4.1 working with shared libraries, and wait for you
> The main problem I see is the fact that that damn Ulrich Drepper forked
> libelf into his bastard "elfutils", which use an older libelf and in
> which libtool was forceably removed from the build.
Hmm, maybe we can use ELFIO or libbfd instead? I wonder why rpm even
needs to parse ELF files directly, instead of using binutils.
Dario Alcocer -- Sr. Software Developer, Helix Digital Inc.
firstname.lastname@example.org -- http://www.helixdigital.com