Development only package?

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 12:46:37PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> Ok, another question. I edited the CMakeLists.txt and changed the
> "STATIC" to "SHARED" and it compiled without issue creating a shared
> library. Is there any down side to doing this?
> 
> I guess now I have something for the pugixml package and then can
> create a -devel subpackage with the header file and API documentation.
>
The downside is that the dynamic linker has a limited understanding of
versioning so that libfoo.so.2 and libfoo.so.3 are considered incompatible
but libfoo.so.2.0 and libfoo.so.2.1 are compatible.  If upstream is making
releases of its libraries without thinking about compatibility and
versioning you may lead people to make false assumptions about this.  The
best bet here is to talk to the pugixml upstream, letting them know how easy
it is to build shared libraries and asking if they're interested in managing
their versions appropriately for that use case.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20110708/fd9ad57c/attachment.bin