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

Re: package name conventions?



On 20041118T094050+1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> From what I can see, the package wouldn't provide anything useful at
> runtime, which is the intent of lib* package (IMO), and a lib*-dev package
> is for providing build-time stuff for a lib* package, so straight up
> pstreams seems like a winner to me.

There are (or at least have been) -dev packages without a corresponding
non-dev package; these are generally libraries where dynamic linking is
not considered useful.  (Even the policy describes this case.)  IMO, the
case of a template library is exactly analoguous, and therefore I'd go
with a lib*-dev.

-- 
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho, Debian developer 

http://kaijanaho.info/antti-juhani/blog/en/debian

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: