[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFS: alure (updated package)



Am 15.04.2011 10:15, schrieb Paul Wise:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Tobias Hansen
<Tobias.Hansen@physik.uni-hamburg.de>  wrote:

Here's what you said:

(08:04:51) pabs: BigMc: since alure is a library, I suggest that you read
libpkg-guide to get familiar with packaging libraries
(08:05:23) pabs: libpkg-guide does recommend libfoo1-dev instead of
libfoo-dev, which is against best practices
(08:07:36) pabs: BigMc: nothing in Debian depends on alure yet, so you won't
need to worry about any transition issues

libpkg-guide says both names are ok for Alure, but of course I believe you
when you say it's against best practices.
I guess I could have been more clear :)

To be clear, libalure-dev is the right name for most cases, you almost
never need a name like libalure1-dev.

Ah, now I see how you meant that 2nd sentence. I thought libfoo-dev is against best practices, you meant "libfoo1-dev instead of libfoo-dev" is against practices...


Reply to: