Build-Depends: libfoo-dev more susceptible to breaking (Re: shared library -dev package naming proposal)

2005-07-15 Thread Junichi Uekawa
Hi, BTW, having Build-Depends: libfoo-dev in a library's build-deps, will allow the developer to overlook a soname change in depending shared library. Which is a bad idea in the QA standpoint. Yes and no. The programer can overlook the soname change for the source. The API hasn't

Re: Build-Depends: libfoo-dev more susceptible to breaking (Re: shared library -dev package naming proposal)

2005-07-15 Thread Stephen Frost
* Junichi Uekawa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: BTW, having Build-Depends: libfoo-dev in a library's build-deps, will allow the developer to overlook a soname change in depending shared library. Which is a bad idea in the QA standpoint. Yes and no. The programer can overlook the

Re: Build-Depends: libfoo-dev more susceptible to breaking (Re: shared library -dev package naming proposal)

2005-07-15 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Junichi Uekawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi, BTW, having Build-Depends: libfoo-dev in a library's build-deps, will allow the developer to overlook a soname change in depending shared library. Which is a bad idea in the QA standpoint. Yes and no. The programer can overlook the

Re: Build-Depends: libfoo-dev more susceptible to breaking (Re: shared library -dev package naming proposal)

2005-07-15 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:18:23PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: BTW, having Build-Depends: libfoo-dev in a library's build-deps, will allow the developer to overlook a soname change in depending shared library. Which is a bad idea in the QA standpoint. Yes and no. The programer