>>>>> "Guillem" == Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> writes:
Guillem> On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 20:30:48 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> with the current packaging tools, you tend to end up producing
>> the .shlibs files in order to manage cross-package dependencies
>> within a single source package. If it were relatively easy to
>> convince the packaging tools to handle dependencies within a
>> source package and to omit including the shlibs file in the
>> binary, I'd buy that as a requirement too.
Guillem> You mean something like debian/shlibs.local or
Guillem> dpkg-shlibdeps -L?
Wrong side.
I'm talking about interfaces like dh_makeshlibs not having an option to
output into a local shlibs file
or to easily say which packages should have symbols/shlibs files get
installed.
Also, there doesn't seem to be local support for symbols files.
That may not be a huge deal, but the layer above dpkg-source not making
this easy is.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
