Re: Library sonames and unstable libraries
Junichi Uekawa wrote:
>>> Too, there are actually two forms of library soname file naming used:
>> Only the first one is mentioned in the various packaging guides,
> hmmm ? excluding this?
Right; I should read the documents I refer to more carefully ;)
>> so I suppose that the format libfoo-1.2.3.so only exists for historical
>> reasons, right? IMHO new packages have to use the form libfoo.so.1.2.3 ?
> That's not quite the case.
Yes, Steve already said that; so, if I understand it correctly, none of
the two formats is preferred over the other one, i.e. if upstream
uses either of them, both would be valid for Debian, right?