Re: Multiple versions of packages...
On Sun, Jan 10, 1999 at 11:12:04PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 1999 at 04:52:02PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > I was looking at the way some packages are named, and found one very
> > > disturbing trend... The naming scheme of packages is not very standardized.
> > > Some Glibc pcakges have a g on the end, some have version numbers, and some
> > > don't.
> >
> > Packages that used to have a libc5 version now have the 'g' extension
> > in order to tell them apart (used during the bo->hamm). The number
> > after it is usually the so version.
>
> Not entirely true, some libraries are named libnameg1, and some libname1g.
> For example, Z lib has zlib1g, and GPM lib has libgpmg1. It would be nice
> to have all of them named alike, but that would be another upgrade problem.
I see...yeah, that should be fixed, but how easily is the problem. I
also notice that some libs use the libfoo style and some don't (slang
and zlib are good examples). Also in the case of slang1, the dev
package is named libslang1-dev.
Will there ever be a time when we dump the 'g' naming scheme?
--
----- -- - -------- --------- ---- ------- ----- - - --- --------
Ben Collins <b.m.collins@larc.nasa.gov> Debian GNU/Linux
UnixGroup Admin - Jordan Systems Inc. bcollins@debian.org
------ -- ----- - - ------- ------- -- The Choice of the GNU Generation
Reply to: