> Andrew Howell writes ("Re: readline and bfd libraries?"): > > librl is the old readline package > > libreadline is the new ELF readline package > > aout-librl is the new a.out readline package > > > > libreadline has an archive library > > What if I want just the shared library ? Is the package small enough > for this not to be a requirement ?
This leads to something I've been meaning to bring up. I'm beginning to think that all packages which provide shared libraries used by other packages need to be split into two or more packages. The first package contains only the shared libraries and minimal support files. The remaining packages should contain everything else (e.g. header files, static libraries, etc.). Also, the packages containing the shared libraries need to be designed such that multiple, major versions of them can coexist. As an example, here is how I'm currently planning to package Tcl in the new ELF version. tcl74 will contain tclsh7.4, libtcl7.4.so.1 and supporting run-time files and documentation. It will coexist with other shared library packages such as tcl75. tcl-dev will contain header files, static libraries and supporting documentation. Only one of these packages will be allowed at a time. BTW, since I used Tcl for my example, I might as well ask this now. The command-level manual pages will go in the tcl74 package and the C-level manual pages will go in the tcl-dev package, but where should the script-level manual pages go? IMO, they should go with the interpreter in the tcl74 package, but making them coexist with tcl75, etc. would be impratical. David -- David Engel Optical Data Systems, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1101 E. Arapaho Road (214) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081