Re: Shared library naming and dashes
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 10:55:50PM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> So, what do you think? Shall I proceed?
No.
No, really, don't. Take a chill pill instead.
Policy documents accepted practice. Our shared library naming
convention _is_ accepted practice. But policy is not a mandate. In
the case of libgnome2-0 vs libgnome-2-0 (libgnome-2.so.0) yes, the
later seems nicer and it's easier on the eyes, but that's a cosmetic
detail. Renaming packages _is not_ supported, you have to play
games[0] with depends, provides and transitional packages which we have
to carry around as dead weight because we happen to support upgrades
across releases.
If you really want to file bugs, ask the maintainers to correct the
problem at the first chance they get (i.e. when the library changes its
soname, which really shouldn't be happening with GNOME at this point in
time), but nothing else.
Marcelo
[0] Not the best example, but it's close at hand:
Package: xlibs
Depends: libice6, libsm6, libx11-6, libxext6, libxft1, libxi6, libxmu6, libxmuu1, libxp6, libxpm4, libxrandr2, libxt6, libxtrap6, libxtst6, xlibs-data
Package: 3dchess
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-4), xaw3dg (>= 1.5+E-1), xlibs (>> 4.1.0)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Reply to: