----- "Marc Lehmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:16:40PM -0400, Michal Nowak > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do you thing it could be possible to avoid such conflict on upstream > > > basis? > > Unlikely, the "conflict" is by design.
But this prevents to have libev's and libevent's libevent.h both in system. And those versions of libevent.h are not the same. > > > Giving example, to install event.h, ev.h and ev++.h to > /usr/include/libev > > by default? > > That would break applications that expect to find it as event.h > (basically > all libevent applications). Now we intend to leave original event.h in in same place where is now and move libev's libevent.h to /usr/include/libev/ and to fix apps relying on libev and looking for ev.h and friends in /usr/include by pkg-config (attached). > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 01:06:27PM -0400, Michal Nowak > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ----- "Matt Tolton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Why not just leave out event.h? That's just for libevent > > > compatibility. > > > > Thanks, that was my original decision. > > Why not do it like other distributions such as debian, where the > common > header files are installed as alternatives, or optionally? > > event.h is an alternative to the libevent event.h, it's not an > unrelated > header file, it serves the same purpose in both libraries. > Not sure what you mean. Now we install header files only when need -- on demand in devel package, so the use of libev itself as a library is in now way prevented. Well, packaging libevent.h in a separate sub-package and make it conflicting with libevent-devel is not necessary, when we move libev to /usr/include/libev and use pkg-config to "find" it. Michal
libev.pc.in
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ libev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libev
