On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 19:27 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On 02/19/2014 01:25 PM, Honza Horak wrote:
> > > On 01/15/2014 04:16 PM, Jan Staněk wrote:
> >
> > > Looking around to some other projects (e.g. v8) people usually tend to
> > > u
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 19:27 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 02/19/2014 01:25 PM, Honza Horak wrote:
> > On 01/15/2014 04:16 PM, Jan Staněk wrote:
>
> > Looking around to some other projects (e.g. v8) people usually tend to
> > use version of the package to be soname version of the library. Howev
On 02/19/2014 01:25 PM, Honza Horak wrote:
On 01/15/2014 04:16 PM, Jan Staněk wrote:
Looking around to some other projects (e.g. v8) people usually tend to
use version of the package to be soname version of the library. However,
I see some questions raised by that approach:
A pretty detailed
On 01/15/2014 04:16 PM, Jan Staněk wrote:
What should one do if the SW he is trying to package produce only
unversioned *.so files? I'm currently trying to package LMDB [1] as
possible alternative for BerkeleyDB in Fedora, and the hand-written
makefile produce only liblmdb.so.
I'm trying to pers
Hi,
What should one do if the SW he is trying to package produce only
unversioned *.so files? I'm currently trying to package LMDB [1] as
possible alternative for BerkeleyDB in Fedora, and the hand-written
makefile produce only liblmdb.so.
I'm trying to persuade the upstream to change it and star
