Re: Including .so symlinks in non-dev package: policy violation?
On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 05:00:19PM +0200, Fabian Fagerholm wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 16:34 +0200, Fabian Fagerholm wrote:
> > The plugin .so's are not designed to be accessed directly. The purpose
> > is to access them through libsynfig, which is properly versioned. In a
> > sense, they differ from shared libraries ("libraries that are to be
> > shared between applications").
> > Is it ok to include the unversioned symlinks for the plugin .so's in the
> > non-dev package (libsynfig0)?
> I forgot to mention that the plugins are shipped
> in /usr/lib/synfig/modules -- so the whole thing looks very much like
> the run-time support programs in policy 8.2, except in this case, the
> artifacts are shared objects, not executables.
Do you actually have to ship them as separate objects, or could you
conceivably link statically to them?
This is what Steve suggested here: