Hi Andy,
You said originally:
> So, like you, I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other right now but may after the weekend is over.
What is your current thinking on this?
Brian
> On Jul 27, 2018, at 9:16 PM, Andrew Hanushevsky <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> I see what they did now. It appears that libcap is v2 but they kept v1 for backward compatability.....
>
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 11 Apr 10 2014
> /lib64/libcap.so -> libcap.so.2*
>
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 14 Apr 10 2014
> /lib64/libcap.so.1 -> libcap.so.1.10*
>
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 15224 Aug 24 2010
> /lib64/libcap.so.1.10*
>
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 14 Apr 10 2014
> /lib64/libcap.so.2 -> libcap.so.2.16*
>
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 16600 Aug 23 2011
> /lib64/libcap.so.2.16*
>
> Andy
>
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2018, Brian Bockelman wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> On Jul 27, 2018, at 7:28 PM, Andrew Hanushevsky <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Brian,
>>>
>>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2018, Brian Bockelman wrote:
>>>
>>>> My understanding is that libcap (from kernel.org) and libcap2 (a second implementation) both implement the same API in the same library name (libcap).
>>> That may be wishfull thinking for RH platforms. RH6 has two separate libraries (v1 and v2). RH7 settled on v2 but then just to make it interesting included libcap-ng (next generation), sigh.
>>>
>>
>> Actually, I'm not sure I really can figure out the difference between v1 and v2 -- it still seems to refer to the same thing. Can you show me the two packages on RHEL6? I only see one.
>>
>> libcap-ng is completely unrelated, I think. It has an API that's less prickly - but I'd rather use the more basic API as it seems libcap (maintained at kernel.org) is more widely found.
>>
>> Brian
>>
########################################################################
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1
|