On Thu, 7 Nov 2013 18:33:13 -0800 (PST), David Highley wrote:
Sounds a bit as if you're missing the *-devel packages for those libs. libX11-devel libxml2-devel and so on.
Ah, now we see the subtlety in the split between development and run time packages. It had not dawned on us that the final symlink is tied to the development package, especially as their are other symlinks being applied.
There is no "final" symlink. They are two separate types of symlinks: The versioned one is maintained by ldconfig for the runtime. The non-versioned .so is used by build-time tools (and may point directly at the fully versioned lib file - there is no need to create a chain of symlinks, such as .so -> .so.1 -> .so.1.0.0).
Note that the split into run-time and build-time packages is somewhat controversial. There are exceptions, where the non-versioned .so symlink is used at runtime (e.g. via a dlopen method). At Fedora, it is not always tried to patch such code to open the versioned library instead. For example, if the developers insist on opening the non-versioned .so (if installed) and try to support a broad range of library interfaces instead of expecting a specific library version. Sometimes packagers accept the burden of adding and updating a patch, but there are exceptions.