Replying to [comment:19 nomeata]:
As nomeata said in comment 16, we can simply ship our .so files in a
Or via a „private version number” – it should be sufficient if they have a file name that’s different from any filename resulting from a separately packaged library. If the purpose of those DSO are actually not really shared, what about simply linking them statically so that no orphaned DSOs are left over? Is
#8919: Why is xhtml library installed but not exported to users? -------------------------------------+------------------------------------ Reporter: simons | Owner: Type: bug | Status: patch Priority: normal | Milestone: 7.8.3 Component: Build System | Version: 7.8.2 Resolution: | Keywords: Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: Other | Difficulty: Unknown Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------ Comment (by slyfox): Replying to [comment:20 hvr]: private directory and make our dynamic programs search there (via RPATH or some other trick). there any value in having DSOs that are used by only one executable? (not very strong pro) Sometimes DSO linking is preferred (to reduce overall code size/exported amount of symbols) of a single module (as a workaround of host OS). -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/8919#comment:21 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler