Abel Cheung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > (gc, seems my previous mail failed to deliver to you and cooker, > will try once more) > > > On 2003-09-02(Tue) 14:32:54 +0200, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > Sigc1.0 is not %mklibname'd, and I'm contacting you for double > > checking my work on it. I've put the package here: > > > > http://peoples.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/pkgs/sigc/ > > > > Please can you double-check with me that I'm not breaking again > > something. It's parallel installable on my machine at least :). > > Yup, they definitely should be parallel installable, otherwise there's > no point in adding version to library names :-)
Yes. Have you tried them on your cooker? > > sigc1.0: mklibname'd > > sigc1.2: s/libsigc/libsigc++/ so that's it's more orthogonal with > > sigc1.0 > > I've made that change (libsigc++ -> libsigc) just because it can reflect > the original library name (libsigc-1.2.so.5). If this is undesirable, > it can be reverted back.... I don't know if it's desirable :). You didn't specify why you changed it in the changelog (or I missed it) and the name of the project is libsigc++ (that can be read all over libsigc.sf.net), just that the sourceforge name is libsigc for unix name simplicity I guess. I think it would be better with libsigc++, no? -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/