On 2/12/07, Aurélien Gâteau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nicolas Lécureuil wrote:
Hi,
what is the status of fixing librairies to not have anymore .so as
libs ? because you provides libs of portaudio ( for exemple) so it
conflicts with portaudio-devel on linux distributions, in + the fact
that
Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Gianluca Sforna wrote:
Are we still talking about distro packages? if so:
Yes.
* put libs into /usr/lib/wengophone
* add a wengophone.conf file into /etc/ld.so.conf.d containing the
single line:
/usr/lib/wengophone
* be sure to call /sbin/ldconfig after package
Gianluca Sforna wrote:
On 2/12/07, Aurélien Gâteau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nicolas Lécureuil wrote:
Hi,
what is the status of fixing librairies to not have anymore .so as
libs ? because you provides libs of portaudio ( for exemple) so it
conflicts with portaudio-devel on linux
On 2/12/07, Andreas Schneider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gianluca Sforna wrote:
On 2/12/07, Aurélien Gâteau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nicolas Lécureuil wrote:
Hi,
what is the status of fixing librairies to not have anymore .so as
libs ? because you provides libs of portaudio ( for
Gianluca Sforna wrote:
http://dev.openwengo.com/trac/openwengo/trac.cgi/changeset/9735
rpath is a no-no in most distros. This change will likely impose
actyually _more_ work to packagers...
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/RpathCheckBuildsys
Looking at the list of RPATH issues
On 2/12/07, Aurélien Gâteau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gianluca Sforna wrote:
http://dev.openwengo.com/trac/openwengo/trac.cgi/changeset/9735
rpath is a no-no in most distros. This change will likely impose
actyually _more_ work to packagers...
