Shared library naming and dashes

[Gustavo Noronha Silva <kov@debian.org>]

Hello,

There's been some discussion at the #gnome-debian channel about
package naming for some shared libraries. Specifically, people
were discussing if libgnome-keyring, which has the following
library should be named: /usr/lib/libgnome-keyring.so.0.0.0.
The package was named libgnome-keyring-0, afaik.

There are some other inconsistencies, also, it seems, like these:

[kov]@[beterraba] $ dpkg -S /usr/lib/libgnomeui-2.so.0
libgnomeui-0: /usr/lib/libgnomeui-2.so.0
[kov]@[beterraba] $ dpkg -S /usr/lib/libgnome-2.so.0
libgnome2-0: /usr/lib/libgnome-2.so.0

Policy states:

"The run-time shared library needs to be placed in a package called
 librarynamesoversion, where soversion is the version number in the
 soname of the shared library[37]. Alternatively, if it would be
 confusing to directly append soversion to libraryname (e.g. because
 libraryname itself ends in a number), you may use libraryname-soversion
 and libraryname-soversion-dev instead."

My reading of that makes me think that the package names
should be libgnomeui-2-0 and libgnome-2-0 respectively.
I've named devhelp0.8.1's library package following this
naming: libdevhelp-1-0, because the library file is:
/usr/lib/libdevhelp-1.so.0.

So, the dash should exist or not? I think it is important for consistency
and we can fix this for gnome2.6, maybe, so we do not impose one
more delay probability for sarge.

Thanks,

-- 
kov@debian.org: Gustavo Noronha <http://people.debian.org/~kov>
Debian:  <http://www.debian.org>  *  <http://www.debian-br.org>
  "Não deixe para amanhã, o WML que você pode traduzir hoje!"
        http://debian-br.alioth.debian.org/?id=WebWML