On Thursday 29 November 2012 09:08:05 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > In KDE4 we do it this way because we did it this way in KDE3. ;-) > Personally I don't care much whether plugins have a "lib" prefix or not. Not > having the "lib" prefix can be interpreted as a hint that this file is not > a normal shared library. > Technically it shouldn't matter I think.
It's more than a hint, it's a strong guarantee, that nobody will ever succeed in linking to a plugin as if it was a shared lib. That's non portable, bad practice, bad design. > I just had a look at the gimp plugin dir, those seem to be executables (no > prefix, no suffix, and they say "compose is a GIMP plug-in and must be run > by GIMP to be used" when executed. Unusual :) At least that makes the lookup cross-platform, without having to mess with extensions. > The following packages installed on my system use plugins without "lib" > prefix: ghostscript, audacious, slang, zsh, gegl, gconv, egl, pango. > > The only plugins I found which clearly seemed to be plugins and not shared > libs which have the "lib" prefix are from CodeBlocks. > > So at least it seems to be quite common to have no prefix for plugins. Right. Qt is the exception there, it uses a lib prefix, but IMHO that's a bug, for the above reason. One day it will switch to cmake and lose the lib prefix :-) Haha. -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE, in particular KDE Frameworks 5 _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
