Re: The *.so files

On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 03:09:20PM -0500, Eric Gillespie wrote:
> That said, let me state that i abhor this practice. When a user
> on such a system installs package 'foo' they later discover they
> have only random chunks of package 'foo', not all of it. That's
> a disservice both to the users and the authors of the software.
>
> I can't tell you how many lists i'm on where someone complains
> they can't compile something and it turns out they didn't have
> the -dev package installed.
>
> Please don't perpetuate this lunacy.

There's one very good reason for it: if you put the plain .so symlink in
the non-development package, then you cannot simultaneously install two
different versions of a library (without Replaces: hacks which mean that
you end up not really knowing where the .so is going to point, or
without changing the entire name so that users have to do -lsvn_client2
or whatever). That's a true pain when it comes time for a soname change.

My experience is with Debian, but I guess the same holds for other
packaging systems too.

-- 
Colin Watson                                  [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org