On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 15:53:51 +0100, Stefan Sonnenberg-Carstens wrote: > Ok, that would mean (for example) "that" here refers to nothing as long as you don't quote anything. Please avoid top-posting. > main package ships *only* libct.so.2.0.0, nothing more Take a look at your package. There are also softlinks of the form lib*.so.$MAJOR_VERSION in the main package, with $MAJOR_VERSION usually being the current API version: lrwxrwxrwx root root 14 /usr/lib/freetds/libct.so.2 For libraries in run-time linker's search path, ldconfig would create and update these links. But nevertheless, packages ought to include them, so RPM database queries work. > and the devel package would ship the symlink libct.so to libct.so.2.0.0 Yes. > After one compiled e.g. php, php *knows* it needs libct.so.2.0.0 and > therefore doesn't need the symlink to libct.so anymore, and the devel > could be whiped away after all. > > Am I right ? Well, what results do you get after compiling software which depends on your package? ;)
