On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Tim Waugh wrote:
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 01:58:57PM +0200, Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> Is there a reason why gphoto2 and libgphoto2 are in the same package
> and not two seperate ones? I'd like a separate libgphoto2
> package. The library is used by more frontends then just gphoto2.
What's the advantage of separating the (tiny) gphoto2 binary out?
Same as always, one can upgrade (or omit) gphoto2 independently from
Having the lib packaged nicely makes it possible to install several
versions of the lib.
gphoto2 pulls in some (not many) dependencies that libgphoto does not
(still, gphoto2 can be built with libaa support, but it is not in fedora).
I just didn't see any reason to put one of the frontends into the lib
package, no matter how tiny it was. It's usually not done that way when a
lib is used by many programs, that's all.