On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 11:54:55AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > On Saturday 03 September 2005 6:11 am, Steve Langasek wrote: > > No, it's not. The .pc names are set by upstream and we should not > > diverge from them, and the package names are governed by Debian policy > > and may not match the names upstream has assigned to the .pc files. > On that note, I'm upstream and co-maintainer for a library package that is > being overhauled. The upstream tarball is qof-0.6.0.tar.gz, the SONAME is > libqof1, the package libqof1 and I want libqof1 >= 0.6.0 as a dependency for > packages that use the library. > Currently, the .pc file is qof-1.pc which probably needs to be changed. > Taking this as an example, what *would* be the recommended name for the pc? > Should it include the SONAME at all? > Should it always use the lib prefix? > Is there any convention on these filenames, independent of any distro? At the present time and given the current state of the software I believe it is not in Debian's best interest that you ship a .pc file *at all* upstream, so I can't offer you any recommendations here. If there are any conventions at all, you'll probably have better luck finding out about them from pkg-config upstream, or from some group such as GNOME or KDE that packages enough libraries to have come up with guidelines about them. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature