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

Package separation/naming conventions

Dear list,

I am currently packaging the "wcslib" package (Bug #641624) as my first
Debian package, and I am wondering about the naming conventions.  The
package contains two libraries, some tools and an common API
documentation for both libraries. I would now make the following binary

- libwcs4 and libwcs4-dev 
- libpgsbox4 and libpgsbox4-dev 

containing the shared libs resp. the static libs+headers of the two

- wcslib-tools 

containing the included binaries

- wcslib-doc 

containing the documentation of the two libraries.

First question is now, Is it wise to call a package containing
documentation for libwcs4 "wcslib-doc"? Usually, the "doc" has the same
base name as the according library, hasn't it? Or is the link here made
with the "suggests/enhances" dependency? And what would then suggest
what? libwcs4-dev suggests wcslib-doc, or vice versa?

Second question: libpgsbox4 depends on a package that is in non-free
(pgplot5), and one of the (three) programs that are in wcslib-tools
depend on libpgsbox4. Should I divide wcslib-tools into two packages 
like the following?

- libwcs4-tools (two small executable)
- libpgsbox4-tools (one small executable)

The three programs are useful by its own.

Best regards


Reply to: