Re: Shared objects renaming patch .so -> .pico

[Nicolas Joly <njoly%pasteur.fr@localhost>]

On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 04:52:11PM +0200, Antti Kantee wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 03:45:14PM +0100, Nicolas Joly wrote:
> > 
> > To avoid conflicts between shared objects and final library names
> > libXX.so, it has been suggested to make objects use the .pico
> > extension instead of .so currently.
> > 
> > Here follow a patch against bsd.lib.mk which does so, for review and
> > tests.
> > 
> > I already tested some archs and `build.sh release' does not show any
> > problem for alpha, amd64 and i386; and some other ones are in
> > progress.  I then booted amd64 and i386 install cdroms (under qemu),
> > and updated my amd64 workstation ... no glitch so far.
> > 
> > Comments ?
> 
> Did you try update builds or non-update builds with a dirty objdir?

All were done for update builds (build.sh -u). For alpha and i386 the
obj tree was empty, while i only removed .so regular files (not
symlinks) on amd64. I'll try a non-update build, and an update build
with .so files.

> Might warrant something in UPDATING if e.g. .so's are left hanging
> behind.

Agreed, will do.

-- 
Nicolas Joly

Biological Software and Databanks.
Institut Pasteur, Paris.