On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, Ian Jackson wrote: > That all sounds reasonable. I take it that the terminfo manipulation > programs and the manpages are small enough that having them installed > on every system is not a problem (ncurses-runtime will be an essential > package).
Actually, they're going into a different package. > Also, we need to decide on the package naming conventions for shared > library packages. Well, tell me if this seems to make sense: ncurses-base-1.9.7a-1.deb will contain a minimum set of terminfo files. It depends on nothing. ncurses2-1.9.7a-1.deb will be the shared library package. It is ncurses2 because the major portion of the soname is 2. It will depend on libc5 and ncurses-base. ncurses-dev-1.9.7a-1.deb wll contain the shared libs, header files and man pages for library routines. It will depend on ncurses2. ncurses-bin-1.9.7a-1.deb will contain the terminfo database manipulation files. It will depend on ncurses2. ncurses-term-1.9.7a-1.deb will contain the monolithic set of terminfo files. It depends on the lockstep revision of ncurses-base (since we might move a few more things out of term and into base as they seem appropriate -- getting out of sync might cause surprise disappearance of important files). > I think that `developer', while nice and explanatory, is rather long > to appear in package listings and the like, so I'd favour using `-dev' > instead. Done. > The runtime package needs to contain the shared library major version > number in its name, and we need to be prepared to install several > versions. Done. Is it necessary or appropriate to have ncurses-dev be ncurses2-dev? Correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't plan to support people compiling with multiple versions, so it should be sufficient to make sure that ncurses-dev merely has the correct dependencies, right? Mike. -- "I'm a dinosaur. Somebody's digging my bones."
