Am Mon, 20 Jul 2009 23:18:23 +0100 schrieb Roger Leigh <rle...@codelibre.net>:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 11:10:11PM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote: > > Hello > > > > In the Cc'ed bug report we were asked to created a libmysqld-pic > > package that only contains libmysqld_pic.a which should be compiled > > with -fPIC. As I'm no library expert I gladly follow the > > recommendation of Policy ยง10.2 and ask for comments :) The reason > > for creating this package was that libmysqld.a (the embeddable > > MySQL server) should be included in other shared libraries, like > > one from Modestas' Amarok package. > > If other libraries are including this library, then why is libmysqld > not being provided as a properly-versioned shared object? Upstream, in this case Monty himself, seems to explicitly want it to be a static library for performance reasons as I read from the discussion in: http://lists.mysql.com/internals/35950 > I am not convinced that compiling with -fPIC is appropriate here--it's > working around the fact that mysql isn't providing a properly > reusable shared library. Linking an -fPIC static library (a) with a > shared library (b) will make the contents of (a) part of the exported > interface of (b) because it will by default be added to the dynamic > symbol table unless you take special action with linker scripts. > > There are obvious issues with security updates if people are linking > against libmysqld.a, since all libraries linking against it will need > rebuilding if there's a security update. If it's shared, that won't > normally be required. At least RedHat and Gentoo already have experimented with building their own shared libraries from libmysqld.a: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=149829 https://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=186606 So I try to get this working on Debian, too, and create a libmysqld0 package with a shared library instead. Speaking of it, which soname version should I give it? 0.0.0? Or something like 0.5137.0 to somehow encode a version as I cannot promise that *I* know when they make API changes? .so.5.1.37 seems not to be a good idea in case MySQL somewhen starts to ship a libmysqld.so.5 themselves. bye, -christian- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
