Re: Providing a non-free alternative to a free package
firstname.lastname@example.org (Olе Streicher) writes:
> Gergely Nagy <email@example.com> writes:
>> firstname.lastname@example.org (Olе Streicher) writes:
>>> For example "saods9" would use slalib as a shared library, and I want to
>>> git the user a choide to run it either with the free, or with the
>>> non-free version.
>> Are the two libraries actually ABI compatible? Somehow I doubt that, but
>> I might just be too sceptic when it comes to non-free software.
> They come from the same author, so I would assume (and test :-) ) that
> they are compatible.
Aha, I see. In this case... well, I don't think there's a solution
that's entirely satisfactory.
The closest thing I can think of, is that one is called libfooN, while
the other libfooN-nonfree, they conflict & replace each other, and both
provide the same filenames. So far, it's easy.
The hard part is making sure that dpkg-shlibdeps does the right thing,
and produces dependencies like libfooN (>= blah) | libfooN-nonfree (>=
blah). I'll leave this part as an excercise for the reader. >;)