This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [RFC] foobar-devel or libfoobar?!
- From: Hack Kampbjorn <cygwin-apps at hack dot kampbjorn dot com>
- To: Stipe Tolj <tolj at wapme-systems dot de>
- Cc: cygwin-apps <cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 16:31:30 +0100
- Subject: Re: [RFC] foobar-devel or libfoobar?!
- References: <3FE83E38.9EAB9A6D@wapme-systems.de>
Stipe Tolj wrote:
I'm packaging mysql-4.0.17 (without server) for dependency to various
packages that I'll support, ie. mod_auth_mysql for the mysql based
HTTP basic authentication for Apache and the new PHP module.
Now I get into a question:
According how maintainers do, it seems that libraries, header files
and base client programs are packages as "foobar-devel" with the same
version-revision tagging. Unfortunatly this is mileading to the things
reflected in the http://cygwin.com/setup.html page, where such a
package is about to be named "libfoobar".
So can we have a discurs on how a unique naming scheme can be
entitled?! Should the mysql client programs, libraries and headers be
named "mysql-devel" or "libmysql"?
foo-devel for all the developer needed files: headers, link libraries, devel
libfoo1 for the DLL for ABI version 1 with only the cygfoo1.dll file.
libfoo2 for the DLL for ABI version 2
When I make a new wget package I have to install gettext and gettext-devel.
But those using wget only need libintl2.
BTW, this one was build with a modified generic-build-script (yes, I
took the note cerious that it is not a generic one ;). But I don't see
actually how I can make the libraries build dynamically too. Currently
I do build them pure statically and afterwards use a "mkdll.sh" script
(should be known on the list) to produce the shared DLLs and the
import libraries. Is there a more convinient way to do this using the
Med venlig hilsen / Kind regards