On 23 June 2007 at 18:18, Andreas Barth wrote:
| * Dirk Eddelbuettel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070623 17:52]:
| > That looks like something I should indeed do for libgsl, given that there
are
| > loads of packages depending on libgsl.
| >
| > Now, I am still calling this libgsl0 even though GSL long pass the 1.0
| > version. Should I switch at the same time, or simply avoid confusing at and
| > just append the 'ldbl' ?
|
| If you do it compatible, there is no need to change name.
Well now I am being confused about the 'do it compatible' part. Matthias'
inital mail didn't actually suggest anything but to rename. So I jump to a
new library name reflecting both the long-overdue post-1.0 of libgsl (which
didn't change its API so I didn't need it then) and the fact that this is a
post-glibc-2.5 build, then I should be fine yet be able to avoid the ugly
'ldbl' suffix.
Dirk
--
Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something.
-- Thomas A. Edison
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
