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

Re: ncurses build options...

On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, Ian Jackson wrote:
> That all sounds reasonable.  I take it that the terminfo manipulation
> programs and the manpages are small enough that having them installed
> on every system is not a problem (ncurses-runtime will be an essential
> package).

Actually, they're going into a different package.

> Also, we need to decide on the package naming conventions for shared
> library packages.

Well, tell me if this seems to make sense:

ncurses-base-1.9.7a-1.deb will contain a minimum set of terminfo files.  
It depends on nothing.

ncurses2-1.9.7a-1.deb will be the shared library package. It is ncurses2
because the major portion of the soname is 2. It will depend on libc5 and 

ncurses-dev-1.9.7a-1.deb wll contain the shared libs, header files and man
pages for library routines.  It will depend on ncurses2. 

ncurses-bin-1.9.7a-1.deb will contain the terminfo database manipulation
files.  It will depend on ncurses2.

ncurses-term-1.9.7a-1.deb will contain the monolithic set of terminfo 
files.  It depends on the lockstep revision of ncurses-base (since we 
might move a few more things out of term and into base as they seem 
appropriate -- getting out of sync might cause surprise disappearance of 
important files).

> I think that `developer', while nice and explanatory, is rather long
> to appear in package listings and the like, so I'd favour using `-dev'
> instead.


> The runtime package needs to contain the shared library major version
> number in its name, and we need to be prepared to install several
> versions.

Done.  Is it necessary or appropriate to have ncurses-dev be 
ncurses2-dev?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't plan to support 
people compiling with multiple versions, so it should be sufficient to 
make sure that ncurses-dev merely has the correct dependencies, right?

"I'm a dinosaur.  Somebody's digging my bones."

Reply to: