On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 12:24 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> True. But that's OK because all of the geda-* program packages that use
> the library are updated at the same time as the library, and I maintain
> all of those packages.
>
> Upstream releases them all as a set. They could be one tarball;
On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 12:02 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> Upstream increments the soname for incompatible changes to the library.
> I've been reflecting that in the package name (libgedaXX) which means
> we've had libgeda2, 3, 5, ... 18, 19, 20. Almost every new version
> requires a new package, w
On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 03:12:45AM +0200, Petri Latvala wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 12:02 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > Upstream increments the soname for incompatible changes to the library.
> > I've been reflecting that in the package name (libgedaXX) which means
> > we've had libgeda2, 3,
Following on from the recent discussions about library packaging, I
could use some advice from the experts on the best way to handle
packaging of libgeda.
The situation is as follows. gEDA consists of a library package and a
bunch of program packages. They come from upstream in different
tarballs,
4 matches
Mail list logo
