On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 06:32:05PM +0100, Olivier Sallou wrote:
Hi Andreas,
I am splitting squizz in packages squizz (binary), libsquizz and
libsquizz-dev as you proposed.
I have an "issue" though, the generated libs (libsquizz) by the tool are
libbioseq and libbioali, not some libsquizz-bioseq kind.
This raise a Warn in lintian.
Should I change the "make" files to modify the libs name, or is it
acceptable anyway...
Yes, I know about this warning. That's why I shortly mentioned that you
might consider two library and two dev packages. However, I would only
do this split is it makes sense from the *content* of the library, i.e.
if each single library would make sense in its own. Otherwise you might
consider overriding the lintian warning and add a comment inside the
override file, why splitting makes no sense.
I could also create (sub)binary packages with package name libbioseq and
libbioali, but I don't think it is acceptable to use several packages
names (not like squizz-xxx). My control file would have source package
squizz and binary packages squizz, libbioali, libbioseq
That's no question of name but rather a question of content. There are
control files (try "apt-get source blast2" for example) which even
create different version numbers for some of the binary packages. So
there is no need to bother about different naming.
Kind regards
Andreas.