On Sat, 25.10.08 13:36, Colin Guthrie (gmane at colin.guthr.ie) wrote:
> Also I wonder why, now that libpulsecore is no longer a normal shared
> library, but more of a "module" why is it stored as follows:
>
> %{_libdir}/libpulsecommon-0.9.13.so
> %{_libdir}/libpulsecore-0.9.13.so
>
> Whereas modules are stored like:
> %{_libdir}/pulse-0.9.13/modules/libalsa-util.so
>
> Would it not make more sense to store it as:
> %{_libdir}/pulse-0.9.13/libpulsecommon.so
> %{_libdir}/pulse-0.9.13/libpulsecore.so
The modules we load via dlopen() where it is easy to pass a proper
path. However, libpulsecommon/libpulsecore are pulled in via normal
linking. That would mean we'd have to use rpath or something similar
for them. Which AFAIK is not well liked by packagers. Also, I am not
sure how my build system would need to look like for that (i.e. use
rpath for these two libs -- but for nothing else)
> Also can the API version and PA version be bumped earlier in master
> (e.g. immediately after tagging the older release)? This would allow for
> a "package" that was shipping a pre-release version of 0.9.14 to keep
> it's version consistent. This is not a biggie, but I think quite a few
> projects work like that, and it may not fit with personal preference etc. :)
Done.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc.
lennart [at] poettering [dot] net ICQ# 11060553
http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4
