RE: [Bug 897] New: ldconfig option to lsbinstall should beremoved

>specifying ldconfig is too problematic. There are various 
>sorts of name 
>collision problems, etc. Also, an LSB conforming application 
>should be using 
>RPATH or something to specify the path tot he libraries, and 
>only depend on 
>the ld.so cache for system provided libraries.   

I don't think there was an intent to specify ldconfig
itself.  Instead, there should be a way for the
system to run a tool if it needs to after a
package has been installed.

Alternatively, we can describe somewhere - I don't know
if this goes in the spec document (certainly not
normative text if it does) what this comment said?
We must provide some guidance to developers, and it's
okay to my mind for that guidance to be that you
will always be outside the "ld.so can find it" space
for add-on (lsb) software.  But lack of guidance is
too confusing.