[Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369





------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl  2006-05-06 06:37 EST -------
The 4th alternative sounds like the best one to me. In this case I don't think
we need to standardise the .so filenames, since they are already under
%{_libdir}/ctapi, making clear what they are and giving apps a unique way to
enumerate all ctapi implementations available (all .so files under %{_libdir}/ctapi)

So I say lets go with the 4th approach:
-ctapi implementing libs go under %{_libdir}/ctapi
-%{_libdir}/ctapi is owned by ctapi-common
-ctapi-common drops a (64 and 32bit?) file under /etc/ld.so.conf.d
-ctapi implementing libs must depend on ctapi-common(.arch?)

Who wants to create the ctapi-common package?

We should also think about a ctapi-devel package containing a unified ctapi.h
ctbcs.h and maybe manpages (from the towitoko ctapi upstream)


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.