About that eeevil library naming decision...
andi at rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de
Mon Feb 25 13:29:27 CST 2002
Some more information:
Maybe we should use libwinecore_XXX.so and libwinedll_XXX.so for the
naming scheme. That'd be pretty reasonable and cleaner/better than
the current approach IMHO, as it'd clearly separate core/dll functionality
in a good way.
Also, there'll always be global installs with wine library paths
added to /etc/ld.so.conf. How would you avoid conflicts then with
equally named libraries in other /etc/ld.so.conf paths ??
Further, a lot of other projects do the very same thing, probably
to avoid the mess we're experiencing now in the first place:
libgtk, libgimp, libgphoto_ libgnome, libvorbis, libgdk, ...
(which also results in pretty long names, so this isn't really an argument
for wine library naming any more)
Now please tell me why this *shouldn't* be done.
And I think you better had some real reasons for that...
OK, who thinks that this is a good thing to do ?
Who doesn't ?
I'd certainly write that mega patch converting Wine to this naming scheme.
Andreas Mohr Stauferstr. 6, D-71272 Renningen, Germany
Tel. +49 7159 800604 http://home.nexgo.de/andi.mohr/
More information about the wine-devel