In <[🔎] 200907221847.44193.leo@alaxarxa.net>, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote:
>I think I have not seen it in the Debian policies. I have a dual role in
> one application: developer and co-maintainer. I would like to ask one
> question that fits in both.
>
>I'm in the bulmages project. It's a big piece of software with several
>applications with libs and plugins. It's a cmake build project. The
> plugins we have are libXXXX.so. I add the properties (soname and version)
> to the plugins as the project main properties. The packages consist in
> several packages, etc.
>
>The second, and it's my main question is about the nomenclature of the
>plugins. The guy says that the Suse force to create a package -dev if you
>have this kind of things (.so and symbolic links -.so.x.y.z). But I did a
>package for some .so (-dev) of the software, but not for all. Do we have a
>similar rule?
Something like that.
(IANADD)
A library package should install lib$SO_NAME.so.$SO_VERSION and be called
lib$SO_NAME$SO_VERSION.
The -dev package for that library should Depend on the library package,
install lib$SO_NAME.so as a symlink to the actual library (provided by the
library package), and be called lib${SO_NAME}-dev.
This allows multiple (major) versions of the library package to be
installed, so that package with binaries that haven't made the transition
can still run and Depend on the only version.
You might even consider making the SO_VERSION part of the lib*-dev package
name.
--
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.