On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 03:12:45AM +0200, Petri Latvala wrote: > On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 12:02 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > > Upstream increments the soname for incompatible changes to the library. > > I've been reflecting that in the package name (libgedaXX) which means > > we've had libgeda2, 3, 5, ... 18, 19, 20. Almost every new version > > requires a new package, with NEW processing by ftp-masters etc. > > That doesn't seem ideal to me. > > > > So I suspect it's better if the binary package was just called libgeda, > > and that the program packages depended on a specific version. However it > > needs to be the exact upstream version without being a particular debian > > revision. > > With that approach, it's impossible to install several different > versions. Or several programs that each depend on a different version of > libgeda.
True. But that's OK because all of the geda-* program packages that use the library are updated at the same time as the library, and I maintain all of those packages. Upstream releases them all as a set. They could be one tarball; originally they were. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]