On 2010/6/3 Adam C Powell IV wrote: [...] > Unfortunately this will likely require the use of rpath to get to the libs, > this is frowned upon in general in Debian. [...]
Are those libraries private to salome? (In other words, are you sure that no other package will be linked against them?) * If yes, there is no reason to provide libsalome5.1.3-0 and libsalome-dev packages, these libs are shipped by another package (python2.5-salome?) and can safely be moved into /usr/lib/salome/ * If no, they should indeed go into /usr/lib/ but name collisions will happen. Maybe the answer is a mix of both, some libs are private and some others are public. BTW when looking at this issue, I found that python2.5-salome contains shared libraries, it thus must be arch:any and not arch:all. It also contains static libraries which can surely be dropped. BTW2, I wonder whether salome, python2.5-salome, libsalome5.1.3-0 and libsalome-dev could be merged into a single package (if all libs are private, of course). Denis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org