On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 08:24:05PM +0100, Wuttke, Joachim wrote: > Thank you, Stanislav, for your helpful explanations. > > Regarding the name of the package: > For many years the upstream project has been called "lmfit" > (since the main application is curve fitting), but the shared > library has been called "lmmin.so" (since the fundamental > mathematical operation is minimization). This legacy makes > it impossible to follow the "most common mechanism" > (as the policy manual says) of choosing a package name > that coincides with the library name. Hence the package name > lmfit3.
Just a couple of last comments: Many library packages in Debian have names very different from the names of their upstream's source packages. This is a common case when one source package generates several binary packages. > Version 3 as in upstream. Well, just a few hours ago the upstream had 3 in the version and 0 in SONAME ;) On what I would like to stress is that in normal cases there is no simple equality between the soname and the version, and if there is, then "... it is a sign that there is a problem with the versioning scheme. Scrap it, and bash the upstream with the libtool manual. It is usually a good sign that either he has not read the manual thoroughly, or he has not understood it, or both." (Debian Library Packaging guide) > Regarding the dev packages: Of course I will keep the > development files separated from the shared library package. > I just do not want thirdly a doc package; I still tend to pack > the examples into the dev package. You seem to continously misread my mails. I was writing precisely about unpacking, installing and purging the *-dev package, and not the main library package (that will be always installed in parallel). -- Stanislav -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100327201646.ga10...@kaiba.homelan
