Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Paul Mahon <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>]

On Thu, 2006-19-01 at 09:49 +0100, neuron wrote:
> Hi Paul !
> 
> > Generally spells in basesystem are not included in the dependency list.
> Ah, right ! I can get list of basesystem spells by
> 'gaze dependencies basesystem 2', right ?
> 
> 
> > BTW, I wrote a similar script which tries to find missing direct and
> > indirect dependencies:
> > http://dufflebunk.homeip.net/~dufflebunk/smgl/listLibDepends.sh
> 
> Aaaah, so I'm reinventing wheel, as usual ;) Good work on commenting the
> script, I'm usually too lazy to do that ... I gave it just a quick look

Thanks. There's nothing wrong with reinvention. I plan to look at your
script and see if there's stuff in it I can apply to mine.

> ./listLibDepends.sh dosbox
> games/games-emulators/dosbox
> Official vs. ELF: ELF dependencies not in direct official list:
>         aalib alsa-lib g++ gcc libggi libgii libpng slang xorg zlib
> 
> Well, you list aalib, however dosbox does not depend on aalib. My guess
> is that libsdl does. This is intended ? Imo, adding aalib dependency
> would be wrong, but what exactly is 'the dependency' seems to me blurry
> last few days.

That output means that one of the binaries (runnable, or a lib) needed a
library provided by aalib. Note that it says 'direct official list'
which means that it's not a dependency of dosbox. But it also means that
it is mentioned somewhere in the dependency tree, if it wasn't, it would
say something like:
Official vs. ELF: ELF dependencies not in direct or indirect official
list:
        xorg

So, that output you got looks to be the expected output if sdl depends
on aalib. 

> It probably has a few bugs hanging around in it, but it was good enough
> > for my purposes.
> 
> And what does not have bugs ? :)
> 
> Thanks, I'll study it more. You seem to be tracking g++ and gcc
> dependency better than I am.
> 
> --
>       neuron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > On Thu, 2006-19-01 at 00:44 +0100, neuron wrote:
> > > I tried to do utility to find binary dependencies of installed spell.
> > > It:
> > >  * Looks for all binary files in the install log
> > >  * For each binary it looks for all libraries the binary needs
> > >  * For each library it tries to find the spell to which it belongs
> > > 
> > > Example:
> > > 
> > > --------------------------------------------------
> > > 
> > > $ ./check.sh gnupg
> > > Spell: gnupg
> > > Executable files:
> > > =================
> > > /usr/bin/gpg
> > > /usr/bin/gpgsplit
> > > /usr/bin/gpgv
> > > /usr/libexec/gnupg/gpgkeys_finger
> > > /usr/libexec/gnupg/gpgkeys_hkp
> > > /usr/libexec/gnupg/gpgkeys_http
> > > 
> > > Libraries:
> > > ==========
> > > libncursesw.so.5:
> > > ncurses-5.4
> > > ncurses-5.5
> > > ncurses-5.4
> > > ncurses-5.5
> > > 
> > > libreadline.so.5:
> > > readline-5.0
> > > readline-5.0.5
> > > readline-5.1
> > > readline-5.0
> > > readline-5.0.5
> > > readline-5.1
> > > 
> > > libresolv.so.2:
> > > 
> > > libz.so.1:
> > > zlib-1.2.3
> > > zlib-1.2.3
> > > 
> > > Library dependencies:
> > > =====================
> > > ncurses
> > > readline
> > > zlib
> > > 
> > > --------------------------------------------------
> > > 
> > > If I do
> > > 
> > > $ gaze dependencies gnupg 2
> > > gnupg ()
> > >         gettext (optional)
> > >         bzip2 (optional)
> > >         openldap (optional)
> > >         nasm (optional)
> > >         libusb (optional)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Isn't gnupg spell missing depends for ncurses, readline and zlib ?
> > > 
> > > I'm attaching the script. It's still quite raw, but should work.
> > > 
> > > --
> > >   neuron
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > SM-Discuss mailing list
> > > SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> 
> 
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > SM-Discuss mailing list
> > SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part