On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 02:13:50PM +0200, Ivan Vucica wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 11:42 PM, Wen-Yen Chuang <caleb@calno.com> wrote:
> > It is possible to provide .so, and it is proved to be working.
> > However, maintainers have to handle all the ABI changes and select
> > suitable so versioning. Upstream of Bullet does not support shared
> > libraries currently.
> >
> > Do we have to provide .so?
> > Or just provides .a, like what upstream suggests?
>
> I'd go for just .a, and just a -dev package. I don't feel that every
> single library has to be made into a .so (there's a library I
> developed, and I don't intend to .so-ify it at all).
The problem with .a only lib package is that it's not possible to know with
which release of the lib the binary had been built.
Cheers,
Gonéri
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature