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

Re: Versionning of non-standalone library packages



fpolacco@icenet.fi writes:
 > On Fri, Jan 16, 1998 at 08:36:39PM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
 > > 
 > > If I get no objections, e2fsprogs_1.10-11 will be shipped with
 > > comerr{2g,g-dev}_2.0-1.10-11.
 > 
 > It was my convincement that policy said that library's binary packages
 > should have the soname version _in_ the name (at the end of the name)
 > and source version as version number.

Yes, I agree with this, but that's not the problem. libcom_err 2.0 has
soname 2, and probably so will have libcom_err 2.1.

The problem I'd like to solve is that this minor "1", as well as the
current minor "0" won't/doesn't appear anywhere.


Further more, the lib sub-packages don't evolve in this case quite as
quickly as the "main" sub-packages, and there is wasted bandwidth on
bumping their deb-release-number with each .diff upload, but I didn't
mention this in my 1st post, though I talk about it in the second one
I just posted, but with no solution (I'm not in a mind-state to find
one now, anyway).

-- 
Yann Dirson  <ydirson@a2points.com>      | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer,
alt-email:     <dirson@univ-mlv.fr>      |     support Debian GNU/Linux:
debian-email:   <dirson@debian.org>      |         more powerful, more stable !
http://www.a2points.com/homepage/3475232 | Check <http://www.debian.org/>


Reply to: