On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 08:36:39AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote : > > Hi, > > > > > Should the package name contain the version number? (like the libssl > > > > packages) > > > > > > Yes, it should be called libssh-0.11-0. > > > > I'd rather call it libssh0.11 or libssh-0.11, since the -0 is the > > package version number (I took the libssl0.9.7 package as example : > > package name is libssl0.9.7, package version is 0.9.7g-1, and package > > filename is libssl0.9.7_0.9.7g-1_i386.deb). > > You are looking at the wrong part of the wrong package, > because libssl is one of the few exceptional packages which > really do have that soname, > > > $ objdump -p /usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.7 | grep SONAME > SONAME libssl.so.0.9.7 > > > > Call your package libssh-0.11-0. This has been corrected. I assume the -0 part is the SONAME major version? Is there any other mistake? > > Quoting from the libpkg-guide (which itself is a quote from vorlon) > I pointed out to you and you probably have not read yet: > > $ objdump -p /path/to/libfoo-bar.so.1.2.3 | sed -n -e's/^[[:space:]]*SONAME[[:space:]]*//p' | sed -e's/\([0-9]\)\.so\./\1-/; s/\.so\.//' I read it, but my not-so-good english and my lack of sleep made me misunderstand a lot of things (in this thread and in the guide you mention). Sorry about that. I am very grateful for the help you've given and time you spend for me. Even if this package is not perfect, and if I don't find a sponsor in the end, I at least learnt a lot of things. Regards -- Jean-Philippe Garcia Ballester
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature