Le Wednesday 05 March 2014 18:40:10 Kevin Kofler a écrit : > Laurent Rineau wrote: > > libQGLViewer (http://www.libqglviewer.com/) is a library that can be build > > with either Qt4 or Qt5, with recent versions. > > > > I am considering providing packages build with both Qt4 and Qt5. I > > personally need both versions for my daily job (to test compatibility). I > > do not think we already have such libraries in Fedora. Do we have relevant > > packaging guidelines for such a case? > > You should build both versions. The 2 versions should NOT conflict; if they > do, please get upstream to rename their libraries to fix the conflict. What do you mean? Currently, the library compiled with Qt4 is: /usr/lib64/libQGLViewer.so -> libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1 /usr/lib64/libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1 Do you suggest that the upstream project should have a different library name when it is compiled with Qt4 and Qt5? Why is that better than the following suggestion: /usr/lib64/libQGLViewer.so -> libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1 /usr/lib64/libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1 /usr/lib64/Qt5/libQGLViewer.so -> libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1 /usr/lib64/Qt5/libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1 Note: you can see that the SONAME of libQGLViewer is libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1. I have encoded that SONAME in the RPM spec, because the upstream project does not handle ELF versionning correctly: they declare libQGLViewer.so.2 as SOVERSION for all versions, whereas the binary compatibility is never ensured: http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/libqglviewer.html The upstream developers do not seem to know who to deal with binary compatibility. That is a different issue. -- Laurent Rineau http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LaurentRineau -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
