https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264686 --- Comment #4 from Marco Driusso <marcodriusso@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #1) > ##libitpp > - The ITPP libraries are compiled and named as 'libitpp'; using this name > for your package is the best choice. As you suggested, I'm changing the name of the package to libitpp. But I have a question. Do I have to change also all the directories names to libitpp? E.g. %{_includedir}/libitpp , %{_datadir}/libitpp ? This should be the logic thing to do, but doing so causes many problems in the devel and doc packages, because: - all IT++ headers uses 'itpp', e.g. #include <itpp/base/factory.h> - all the IT++ HTML documentation is written accordingly, and hence it is plenty of #include <itpp/...> So, at this stage, I think we have two choices: 1) use itpp as the name of the package, as suggested at the beginning, regardless of the fact that the lib file name is libitpp.so; 2) use libitpp as the name of the package, but leaving the include dir named as %{_includedir}/itpp Earlier versions of the itpp package for fedora (back in 2011) used choice 1). OpenSUSE spec uses choice 2). What do you think? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review