https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326504
--- Comment #28 from Dave Love dave.love@manchester.ac.uk --- (In reply to Jun Aruga from comment #24)
I got a great feedback from a person in the upstream on the ticket. The htslib's so version rule is following Fedora's glibc's rule.
glibc follows the normal rules about sonames, and has a policy to preserve backwards compatibility, so the major version is constant.
So, can we use the built so files without changing so version, can't we? If you like, I will revert my modification for %make_build and %make_install line.
$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libc-2.29.so glibc-2.29-15.fc30.x86_64 $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libc.so.6 glibc-2.29-15.fc30.x86_64 $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libc.so glibc-devel-2.29-15.fc30.x86_64 $ ls -l /usr/lib64/libc[-.]* -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 6699224 Jun 6 14:09 /usr/lib64/libc-2.29.so* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 16258354 Jun 6 14:10 /usr/lib64/libc.a -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 253 Jun 6 13:55 /usr/lib64/libc.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Jun 6 13:55 /usr/lib64/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.29.so*
The soname is libc.so.6, and there isn't a libc.so.<something else>. If you're not convinced, I should ask on the devel list, or at Red Hat, where there are libc maintainers.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org