From: Domenico Andreoli (cavokz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-27 05:40:30
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 10:04:26PM -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 01:15:31PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > The solution is to keep the names decorated with both python versions,
> > but to maintain a farm of symbolic links pointing to the current python
> > version. As Steve noted, you don???t need one for the runtime libs, but
> > for the .a and the .so symlink that are used at build time, this is
> > required.
> OK, both you and Bernd suggested rtupdate. Bernd even pointed me to a
> description of it ; thanks. Let me see if I understand your
> The idea is to create a single -dev package that contains the
> following in /usr/lib:
> The -dev package contains an rtupdate script to create the following
> symlinks (also in /usr/lib):
> Does that sound right?
It may sound even better if multiple Boost versions were considered,
packaging them in versioned source packages (ie boost-1.34.1,
boost-1.35.0). Respective -dev packages should then be also versioned
and conflicting each other, as the mostly undecorated symlinks there
provided. Having boost-defaults driving the default Boost and Python
versions and the completely undecorated symlinks.
This, for instance, would allow Boost 1.35.0 in lenny while 1.34.1
being the default one. I frankly doubt a full transition to 1.35.0
would happen before the release of lenny.
-----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok
---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk