Compile-time shared library name mismatching base name (SDL)

[Petr Machata]

Petr Pisar <ppisar at redhat.com> writes:

> Is the installed libSDL.so symlink a mistage in the SDL-devel package?
>
> Is renaming libSDL.so to libSDL-1.2.so wise? The libSDL.so is used in
> upstream and other distributions.

I'm speculating here, but renaming the actual DSO like this would make
it possible to install two runtime SDL versions side by side (say, 1.2
and 2.0).  However, it's safe to assume that you'll only ever need one
SDL-devel, so it's fine to just name the symlink libSDL.so--which allows
you to use -lSDL on compiler command line (instead of having to spell
out -lSDL-1.2).

No idea why it confuses ldconfig like this though.

Thanks,
PM