On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 12:00:40PM +0100, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 11:57:23AM +0100, Silke Reimer wrote: > > I agree completely with you. I already statet on this list that I > > wouldn't included that version in the package name. In my opinion the > > soname is not exactly correlated to the software version - even when > > the soname has to change each time a new gdal version is released due > > to the not yet stable C++ ABI. > > > > I would suggest to add the soname to the package name and use the gdal > > version as debian version, i.e. libgdal<soname>-dev-1.3.1-1, > > libgdal<soname>-1.3.1-1 etc. > > > > Sigh, you mean libgdal1-1.3.1 and libgdal1-1.3.1-dev as package name, I > suppose... No. I mean, that libgdal1 should be renamed to libgdal2 when the soname changes the next one will be libgdal3 etc. Thus having libgdal1-dev and libgdal1 and (for version 1.3.1 of gdal) libgdal2 and libgdal2-dev etc. Silke -- Intevation GmbH Georgstrasse 4 49074 Osnabrück, Germany http://intevation.de http://intevation.de/~silke FreeGIS.org http://freegis.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature