Re: [PULL]Fix moving libtcl8.5.so into tcl-lib.

[Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>]

On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 09:16 -0600, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 11/8/10 10:52 PM, Lu Jingdong wrote:
> > Saul:
> >
> >      tcl provides only one library named "libtcl8.5.so" and it hasn't
> > libraries named like "libtcl8.5.so.*". So when we use "so.*" in  FILES_
> > ${PN}-lib = "${libdir}/libtcl8.5.so.*", we can't include "libtcl8.5.so"
> > into "tcl-lib" package and we can't get the package "tcl-lib" because it
> > is a empty package.
> >
> >      It doesn't like other libraries. For example, libxcb provides
> > "libxcb-glx.so.0.0.0", "libxcb-glx.so.0" and "libxcb-glx.so". Among of
> > them, "libxcb-glx.so.0" and "libxcb-glx.so" are symbol links of
> > "libxcb-glx.so.0.0.0", so we can use the "so.*" and it includes the
> > following two files("libxcb-glx.so.0.0.0" and "libxcb-glx.so.0"). The
> > file "libxcb-glx.so" is in the "libxcb-dev" package. I am not sure
> > whether "libxcb-glx.so" should in the "libxcb-dev".
> 
> This is likely a check we may want to add to our QA suite.  The rule for which 
> symlinks must be in the run-time package vs a development package is:
> 
> 
> Run-time:
> The actual dynamic library file (duh)
> Symlinks to the dynamic library file with the filename of an SONAME specified by 
> the library file
> 
> 
> Development:
> Any "other" symlinks to the dynamic library NOT referenced by an SONAME
> Any static library files
> Any symlinks to static library files
> Any (related) .la files
> Any (related) .pc files
> Any (related) headers
> 
> 
> It should be fairly simple to validate the run-time, and lack of development 
> components in the run-time package.
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if this validation is already part of the sanity checking, or 
> would this be an enhancement?

I think its all already part of the sanity checks...

Cheers,

Richard