RE: Is this really the debian way ?

[Roelof Wobben <rwobben@hotmail.com>]

----------------------------------------
> From: rwobben@hotmail.com
> To: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
> Subject: RE: Is this really the debian way ?
> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 18:54:02 +0000
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> To: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
>> From: nospam@vuorela.dk
>> Subject: Re: Is this really the debian way ?
>> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 15:10:26 +0000
>>
>> On 2014-02-08, Roelof Wobben <rwobben@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> DEB_DH_MAKESHLIBS_ARGS_libcjs0c = -Xusr/lib/cjs-1.0/ -V'libcjs0c (>= $(DEB_UPSTREAM_VERSION)), libcjs0-$(LIBMOZJS)' -- -c4
>>
>> I don't see anything wrong here. It is not in the 'beginners end' of
>> library packaging, and library packaging is not in the 'beginners end'
>> of packaging.
>>
>> The more complex the libraries, the more complex you often need to be in
>> your rules file.
>>
>> In this case, it ensures that anything that links libcjs0c ensures that
>> it is installed along with the libcjs0-$(LIBMOZJS) package.
>>
>> /Sune
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>> Archive: [🔎] ld85p2$hdn$1@ger.gmane.org">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] ld85p2$hdn$1@ger.gmane.org
>>
>
> Thanks for the explanation.
>
> Roelof
>

One thing I find wierd. 
I looked at the sources of Fedora and Arch Linux and they do not use this trick.

Can anyone explain this to me?

Roelof