packaging libraries with no versioned .so files

Till Maas opensource at till.name
Fri Mar 20 18:19:07 UTC 2009


On Do März 19 2009, Alex Lancaster wrote:

> The guidelines don't appear to cover the case of packages that only
> consist of unversioned .so's.  Ideally upstream would add the

The Review Guidelines are easier to understand:

| MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
| libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go
| in a -devel package.

Imho this means, that the .so files without other suffixed .so.* files go in 
the main package.

Regards,
Till
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090320/09b48a3c/attachment.sig>


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list