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

Help getting unsubscribed



-- [ From: Lynn F Coker * EMC.Ver #3.2 ] --

I have been mistakenly placed on this mailing list and get many many copies of
mail as a result.  I am copied as a BCC.

Can you help me get unsubscribed?

Thanks.

Lynn
-------- REPLY, Original message follows --------

Date: Sunday, 30-Mar-97 11:26 PM

From: Martin Soto              \ Internet:    (masoto@uniandes.edu.co)
To:   debian devel             \ Internet:    (debian-devel@lists.debian.org)

Attachment: mimemsg.doc Code: 180SF6O  \ Created: Unknown [3 Kb]

Subject: Shared library names

Hi all:

I'm finishing packaging the WXWindows GUI library for Debian but I
have a little problem that is stopping me.  Since the upstream
makefiles don't have any support for shared libraries, I had to hack a
solution up for generating them myself from debian/rules.  My solution
seems to work just fine, but I don't know how to assign major and
minor library numbers to the shared libraries.

I've been searching around the net for a Linux version of WXWindows
but I only found an a.out binary package based on a very old version
of the library (it looks like nobody is officially maintaining
WXWindows for Linux these days).  Then, it seems I'll have to assign
the numbers myself, at least for the sake of the Debian package.  I
have two options here:

1 - Number the shared libraries according to the upstream version
number (currently 1.66), thus naming the shared library as
libwx_ol.so.1.66.  The advantage of this method is that the library
number can easily be related to the corresponding upstream sources,
but it's disadvantage is that if the upstream version number is
changed to, say, 2.0 the soname of the shared library will change even
if the interface of the library hasn't changed.  The old package I
found on the net is numbered like this.

2 - Number this first set of Debian libraries as 1.0, and increase
this number as new upstream versions are released (of course, change
the soname only when the interface of the shared libraries changes).
With this method, I would have to maintain the shared library number
and it wouldn't be related to the upstream version number, but I could
keep things working cleanly no matter what happens to the upstream
code.


I personally prefer the second option, but I'd like to first here your
opinions before proceeding.  Comments?

Regards,

M. S.

------------
Martin A. Soto J.                           Profesor
Departamento de Ingenieria de Sistemas y Computacion
Universidad de los Andes      masoto@uniandes.edu.co




-------- REPLY, End of original message --------



Reply to: