Re: How about some uniformity in doc names
Joel Klecker <jk@espy.org> wrote:
> At 23:47 +0200 1999-10-11, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
>>Maybe should the policy told about libraries, too?
>>The common naming scheme is 'lib*', but there are 'xlib6g' and 'zlib1g'
>>which broke this convention.
> policy already knows about libraries, the two packages you cite are
> examples of packages named wrongly, but it is currently not possible
> to smoothly rename them due to the lack of versioned provides in dpkg.
I can't find anything in the policy that says shlib packages must start
with lib. Personally I don't think it makes sense in all cases anyway.
For instance, lesstif makes a lot more sense than liblesstif since there
isn't any shlib with lesstif in its soname.
> As zlib maintainer, I have developed a plan to phase in 'libz1' over
> time, I have figured out how to do it without versioned provides.
I'm doing it for V too since the upstream is now using a different soname
for each release :( But in general, I think we should leave it to the
developper rather than stipulate it in the policy.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Reply to: