Hi,
>What exactly? I mean dh_build, dh_clean, dh_install and so on :) >I would like to avoid that, mainly because the work would be obsolete soon, >as upstream wants to switch to CMake in the (more or less) near future. ack then >You realized that these files aren't symlinks but libraries? So really >don't think this would be correct. One example: So I guess you should create the library and symlink the so file? (I mean, a library and a library-dev with the so symlinked) dynamic shared libraries without soname are so painful (unless they are kept private, and I don't remember the package right now) I still don't understand, even after looking at the package sed 's/@DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH@/$(DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH)/g' debian/libpanda3d$(P3DVER).links.in > debian/panda3d$(P3DVER).links why a libpanda3d*.links.in becomes a panda3d*.links? at the end the result is somewhat correct, but I presume there are some packaging issues, e.g. the libpanda3d1.9.0 package contains .so files, but they are just links. cheers, G.
