Hi, On Tue, 6 Sep 2011, Paul Elliott wrote:
The Problem is the package that must be installed (i.e. master package) the libFOOX package, is also the package that varies most rapidly. The libFOOX package changes with every new SONAME. The libFOO-devel package depends on _A_ libFOOX package, but it can outlive any one of them.
That's not correct. A libfoo-devel package of a certain version depends on exactly one specific libfooX package, as the .so softlink needs to point to a certain .so.X file, and that X is exactly the X in the package name.
You might want to have a pointer in libFOO-devel to the copyright file
And even if the above weren't true you would solve all problems by not wanting such a pointer. But as the above is true all your worries vanish.
Also, at least under debian there can be more than one libFOOX package installed!
That's the whole point of encoding the major version in the package name, indeed.
In this case, a copyright file owned by libFOOX can not be installed in a common place like /usr/share/packages/libFOO because you would get 2 packages owning the same file.
Ehh? That's why we have this discussion, the proposal is to put the license into /usr/share/packages/libfoox.
To distribute a program you must develop it first. But to develop it you will need the -devel package. It that package contains the license you will have your opertunity to read the license. Distributing is the activity that usually triggers the need for a license. Thus it is OK for the license info to be in the -devel package.
No it's not. Think about libfoo5 and libfoo6 that have different licenses. As there's only one -devel package you wouldn't be able to see both licenses. Ciao, Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org