On Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 07:54:31PM -0400, Gregory S. Stark wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam P. Harris) writes: > > "Scott K. Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 02:16:59PM -0400, Gregory S. Stark wrote: > > > > "Scott K. Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > You have libpkg, it is included in the apt package. Run ldconfig. > > > > Uhm, shared libraries are supposed to be in separate packages with > > > > the soname version in their names. Packaging them in the same > > > > package as the binaries that use them is asking for trouble and > > > > violates policy. > > > Nothing else uses the shared libraries (they are only used between > > > the various apt binaries). In addition, the package was originally > > > constructed to make it easy to download out of experimental and > > > install. Finally, I offer as precident, the dpkg package. > Uhm, i expect dpkg probably predates the policy.
Actually, no, there wasn't a libdpkg until about a year ago. LONG after we had informally arrived at our shared library scheme. That was one of the first things Klee did, along with folding in Tom Lees i18n patches. > It ought to be possible to have debhelper automatically split off library > package, the contents are very predictable. Then it should be possible to > have the APT GUI automatically install and deinstall needed libraries -- > without prompting the user. That should make all of this pretty painless > both for the maintainer and the user. Urk---it's not _totally_ predictable. And what if debhelper has, !horrors!, a bug or two? Mike. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
