Re: possible mass-filing of bugs: many shared library packages contain binaries in usr/bin
Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> immo vero scripsit:
> > No, -dev should have the following entry:
> >
> > Package: libsomething1-dev
> > Provides: libsomething-dev
> > Conflicts: libsomething-dev
> >
> > so that only one version of the -dev package will be installable.
>
> That is exactly what Stephen said.
Stephen said libsomething1 should conflict with libsomething2,
which is undesirable.
>
> > > Either way it is not *automatically* a bug to have a binary in a library
> > > package.
> >
> > I have clued you to the problems and solutions, can you still say that
> > again?
>
> I agree that it is not, in general, a good idea to provide programs in a
> shared library package. However, it is not a bug in itself, as there are
> reasonable and useful ways in which it can be done safely. For example, if
> I supply a libfoo1-whizbang script in my libfoo1 package which would coexist
> with a libfoo2-whizbang script supplied by a future libfoo2 package.
Yes, but that doesn't happen all the time.
Binaries found in runtime shared library pacakge should be
named with sonames in mind, or tucked in somewhere inside
/usr/lib/libsomethingX/<script-goes-here>
regards,
junichi
--
dancer@debian.org : Junichi Uekawa http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423 7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4
Libpkg-guide: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: