On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 11:34:03AM +0100, Aurelien Bompard wrote: > Hi all > > A question to packagers: what would you think of a policy to add the library > soname in package libraries ? Yes, please. This is very important for smooth upgrades, i.e. no pressure to rebuild all dependent packages in one atomic step. This becomes even more important for a community with multiple repos like fedora core is evolving to. > For example, I have a libkexif package, which > provides libkexif.so.0, and at least 3 applications depend on it. Now there > is an update to libkexif, which provides libkexif.so.1. I can't update > libkexif without updating the applications depending on it. > OK, this is probably something that you know much better than me, and that > you've run into several times before, so you probably already know the > solution. I've searched a bit, and it seems that Mandrake and Debian both > have a policy to include the library soname in the package name : > http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/twiki/bin/view/Main/RpmHowToAdvanced#Library_policy > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html > > How about a similar policy for Fedora ? Is it the best solution to this > problem ? I think this is an area, where other distributions have found nice solutions and Fedora/Red Hat should simply use one of the existing policies (instead of creating one from scratch). I think there aren't that big differences in Mandrake's vs Debian's policies. BTW ATrpms has been converting library packages to use this scheme for quite some time in order to have good gluing components between the various repos. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpWv8IhK7vK0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
