On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 2:05 PM, David C. Rankin < drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for your help. I solved the libssl issue by installing libssl-compatibility from AUR. However -- that brought to light another problem brought on by recent updates that moved libssl.so.25 to libssl.so.26. I've checked AUR and there isn't a compatibility package. The error received from the createrepo app was:
[12:57 nirvana:/usr/lib] # createrepo -h Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/createrepo/genpkgmetadata.py", line 26, in <module> import rpm File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/rpm/__init__.py", line 7, in <module> from _rpm import * ImportError: libkrb5.so.25: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
Crossing my fingers that the libraries would be backwards compatible for the purposes of 'createrepo', I just did:
ln -s libkrb5.so.26 libkrb5.so.25
which did work with createrepo, but this feels like a cluge. In this situation, what is the proper solution? 'createrepo' is a python package (python is a snake to me), so do we grep on libkrb5.so.25 and change to 26? Do we issue a report or request for some type of compatibility package for libkrb5? Or did we just develop a compatibility package with the symlink?
Symlinking so's is unadvisable as it's bound to get you in trouble sooner or later -- clearly in your case it's sooner. The only reason I can think of to install a compatibility package is one of two reasons: 1) The package is a closed source binary and you're waiting for upstream to rebuild it for you. 2) The package won't build against the new .so and you're waiting for a patch from upstream. Is one of these stopping you from rebuilding the package rather than applying all manner of bandaids? d