RFC: Soname in rpm name

[Axel Thimm]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 05:29:55PM -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 23:08:47 +0100, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at atrpms.net> wrote:
> > The current solutions are too hackish to be even considered a natural
> > approach. Look at gcc34 and the required obsoletes in gcc to deal with
> > this cruft. A proper scheme of coexisting packages for certain classes
> > (libraries, compilers, interpreters) layed out once and for all will
> > bring piece here forever ;)
> 
> But is there clean way to indicate to a user that an older version of
> the library is no longer being maintained  and has "expired" and won't
> be getting any security updates? This is not not just an issue of
> finding the unused libs. An unmaintained library package could still
> be in use by an application.  How do you make the admin aware that a
> library package they are using is no longer being maintained so they
> can review whether or not to keep it and the applications using it
> installed?  Unless there is a mechanism by which admins are informed
> of an expiring library so they can make an informed decision, i don't
> feel its worthwhile to encourage the accumulation of older libraries
> at all.

Not sure how this fits in here. These are valid points you make, but
they are valid for both the current and a soname-in-the-rpmname scheme
:)

The problem you are addressing is much larger, if you do a RH7.3 ->
RH8.0 -> ... -> FC3 upgrade party you'll find that your system has
quite a lot of old unsupported cruft left over. Any deprecated not
replaced package will be there including its security implications.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20050124/92a6acb2/attachment-0002.bin