Re: Advice needed on ffcall packaging

[Marco Atzeri <marco dot atzeri at gmail dot com>]

On 20/02/2018 16:47, Ken Brown wrote:
> A few years ago I adopted ffcall (32-bit only) in order to keep it from 
> disappearing from the distro:
>
>    https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin-apps/2015-07/msg00092.html

> But I'm not starting from scratch, and users of the existing ffcall will 
> need the new libffcall-devel.  I can think of two possibilities for 
> handling this:
>
> A) Pretend that I'm starting from scratch, and deal with the fallout. 
> There probably won't be any, since ffcall is not currently required by 
> any other package.  As far as I know, its only use is that it's a build 
> requirement for clisp, which I maintain.
>
> B) Make three packages as above, with the source-only package being 
> called libffcall instead of ffcall.  (libffcall is the upstream name 
> anyway.)  I could then make libffcall-devel obsolete ffcall.

> Maybe this is much ado about nothing, but I'd appreciate advice.
>
> Ken

Both are fine.
B is more in line with current trend in package name but it is
just personal taste.

Regards
Marco