RFC: Soname in rpm name

[Axel Thimm]

On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 01:19:46AM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 23:48 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 12:34:27AM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > > My concern is that such a scheme _when applied as a standard procedure
> > > for all library packages_ would probably lower the barrier for including
> > > backwards compatibility cruft for which there will probably no
> > > interested parties to clean it up nor maintain.
> > 
> > There's no need to, these packages can be easily marked (see my other
> > replies in this thread) and removed even in cron-jobs.
> 
> My concern not about that, but about what's included in the distro, as
> in DVD's, download.fedora.redhat.com etc.

There isn't anything wrong in having these packages follow the
soname-in-rpmname idiom. Even if there would be no further need for
concurrent libs it would solve the leftover libs of previous Fedora
Core/Red Hat Linux installations.

I only see added value at no real cost: the required simple garbage
collector pays off immediately for not having to obsolete old forward
compatibility packages (like the gcc34 example, not a library, but the
same packaging issues apply here).
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20050125/957d3b08/attachment.sig>