Hi Zbigniew and Kevin
Many thanks for your explanation.
I clearly understand the htslib's situation now.
--
Jun | He - His - Him
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Jun Aruga wrote:
> Someone, could give us advice about below situation, if the new
> package htslib's "/usr/lib64/libhts.so.1.9" is valid?
> "1.9" is upstream software's version. "2" is ABI's version (so version).
This can happen with non-autotools, non-libtool projects. libtool enforces
some
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 06:03:26PM +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:
> Someone, could give us advice about below situation, if the new
> package htslib's "/usr/lib64/libhts.so.1.9" is valid?
> "1.9" is upstream software's version. "2" is ABI's version (so version).
The patterns used in filenames of so
Someone, could give us advice about below situation, if the new
package htslib's "/usr/lib64/libhts.so.1.9" is valid?
"1.9" is upstream software's version. "2" is ABI's version (so version).
```
sh-5.0# ls -l /usr/lib64/libhts.so*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Oct 2 23:50 /usr/lib64/libhts.so
Hi all,
Someone (especially proven packagers), could you review below library
package related to bio science?
It has already been reviewed several times. I think I fixed every
items mentioned by a reviewer.
Review Request: htslib - C library for high-throughput sequencing data
formats (required
