Jack Howarth wrote:
[]
If fink's dpkg weren't so brain dead about shared library versioning
While you have IMHO correctly diagnosed the idiocy of freeglut using the
same name libglut.3.dylib as the old glut when it is not a binary
compatible dropin replacement, you are certainly barking up th
Chris,
I've tried a test build of the current glut package where I have
the following packaging...
...for the glut package...
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 744232 17 Apr 15:56 /sw/lib/glut/libglut.a
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 14 17 Apr 15:56 /sw/lib/libglut.a -> glut/libglut.a
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root
Chris,
Well I did a quick test of changing the versioning and that doesn't help
much under fink anyway. If I use...
Package: freeglut
Version: 2.2.0
Revision: 2
GCC: 3.3
Maintainer: Jack Howarth bromo.med.uc.edu>
Source: mirror:sourceforge:freeglut/%N-%v.tar.gz
Source-MD5: 9439b8745f443131c2d
On Apr 17, 2005, at 11:55 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Dan,
What if we patch the freeglut package to build with a different
shared lib version number? I think this is the main source of the
confusion out there. The developers of freeglut let it create a
libglut.3.x.x.so/dylib when it should have bee
