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

Re: GCC 3.2 transition



On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 02:51:34PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>      * If you maintain a library written in C++, add a `c' to the end of
>        the name of your .deb, eg libdb4.0++.deb -> libdb4.0++c.deb. This
>        is similar in spirit to the glibc transition adding `g' to the end
>        of libraries.
>      * You should not add a `c' to your -dev package.
>      * The exact placement of the `c' can be tricky. It's not terribly
>        important; the important thing is that the new package conflicts
>        with the old and has a different name. Stylistically, we prefer to
>        keep the `c' adjacent to the soname number, eg libqt3c-mt-odbc,
>        but if your package ends in a ++, put the `c' after that.
>      * Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
>      * Ensure that you're using g++-3.2 to build your library (setting
>        CXX in the environment will normally do the trick).
>      * Add a build-dependency on g++-3.2 in your control file (this can
>        be removed after gcc-defaults is changed).
>      * Wait until all your dependencies have been uploaded in `c'
>        versions.

What should maintainers of ordinary non-library packages written in C++
do? Presumably it will be possible to upload with a build-dep on g++-3.2
pretty much as soon as a transition plan is finalized, provided there
are no library dependencies beyond libstdc++.

(Yes, there's a certain amount of pride here in trying to save work for
whoever ends up mass-NMUing ...)

-- 
Colin Watson                                  [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]



Reply to: