On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:18 AM, felix winkelmann <bunny...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Ivan Raikov <ivan.g.rai...@gmail.com> wrote: >> This means that we cannot have a Debian package for Chicken 4, >> because Debian insists on having a soname version, so that it can do >> things like installing libchicken 3 and 4 alongside each other.
> I wonder what's the point of enforcing use of soname, if (for example) > header-files are usually not versioned. What if you want to install > a chicken.h 3 and 4 alongside each other? Debian versions the header files etc. in package-specific directories (example: /usr/include/python2.5 and /usr/include/python2.6), but dumps all public libraries in /usr/lib. For python it seems to use a dummy soname and change the basename of the library -- /usr/lib/libpython2.4.so and libpython2.5.so. You could perhaps argue for a special case exception: that libchicken is a private library of sorts and deserves to live in a versioned directory. Or request the soname be allowed to remain blank and version the library basename itself, e.g. /usr/lib/libchicken4.so, libchicken3.3.so. The latter would require some tweaks to csc. Just a thought. _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
