On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 10:40:13AM +0200, Marco Driusso wrote: > Hi all, > > I have a question about the right name to give to a package of the IT++ > library (package review request here -> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264686, any review - and also > sponsorship, I need one! - is welcome). > > Some info: > - the actual name of the library is 'IT++', according to their web page and > documentation http://itpp.sourceforge.net/4.3.1/; > - the package used to be called 'itpp' in former versions of the spec in > Fedora (now dead, since 2011); > - the installed library comes out from the build process as 'libitpp.so*', > but all headers are under %{_includedir}/itpp, of course contain a lot of > #include <itpp/someheader.h>, and of course all HTML documentation is > written accordingly (basically, everything is called itpp*, except the > actual lib file, which is called libitpp.so); > - the package is named 'libitpp' in other distros, e.g. Ubuntu, openSUSE. > > So I think we have two options: > 1) use 'itpp' as the name of the package, which corresponds to the include > dir name, but not to the lib file name (libitpp.so); in this case we will > have: > %{_libdir}/libitpp.so* > %{_includedir}/itpp > %{_datadir}/itpp > %{_docdir}/itpp (<- comes out from %doc directive) If we're sure there are no conflicts, what about a name itpp with a provides libitpp ? Pierre -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
