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

Re: geda library packaging

On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 03:12:45AM +0200, Petri Latvala wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 12:02 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > Upstream increments the soname for incompatible changes to the library.
> > I've been reflecting that in the package name (libgedaXX) which means
> > we've had libgeda2, 3, 5, ... 18, 19, 20. Almost every new version
> > requires a new package, with NEW processing by ftp-masters etc.
> > That doesn't seem ideal to me.
> > 
> > So I suspect it's better if the binary package was just called libgeda,
> > and that the program packages depended on a specific version. However it
> > needs to be the exact upstream version without being a particular debian
> > revision.
> With that approach, it's impossible to install several different
> versions. Or several programs that each depend on a different version of
> libgeda.

True. But that's OK because all of the geda-* program packages that use
the library are updated at the same time as the library, and I maintain
all of those packages.

Upstream releases them all as a set. They could be one tarball;
originally they were.

Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>

Reply to: