On Aug 13 10:14, James R. Phillips wrote: > --- Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > Packaging looks good, but isn't the name incorrect? Isn't the > > name of the package fftw3, not fftw? > > On Debian that is correct. Also, under the existing cygwin build, libraries > are built with that name, i.e. /usr/lib/libfftw3.la. This is because the api > changed with release 3, so upstream built that feature in to the makefile. > > If I name the package fftw3, it will be consistent with the library name, but > inconsistent with the upstream source file name (fftw-3.0.1.tar.gz). As it > is, > (fftw) it is inconsistent with the library names. So which correspondence is > more important to maintain: consistency with the library names, or consistency > with the upstream source file name?
The idea is to name the package (and library) so that you can add a new lib package if a new, API incompatible lib version is released. If you're sure that won't happen, then you're done. Otherwise, you will simplify your own maintanence work in the future. Maybe you should split the fftw package into the fftw base package and the libfftw3 runtime library package which only contains the two DLLs? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com Red Hat, Inc.
