Renaming a shared library in the port-framework to match FreeBSD naming schemes?

[Andrew W. Nosenko]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 03:42, O. Hartmann
<ohartman at mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> On 11/23/10 02:14, Andrew W. Nosenko wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 22:20, O. Hartmann
>> <ohartman at mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>  wrote:
>>
>> But there lives another problem: Xerces people doesn't expect parallel
>> installation of the "evelopment" part of Xerces-C (headers,
>> pkg-config, etc).  At least it seems so by listing the libxerces-c
>> package from Ubuntu.
>
> I guess so, but some ports of the FreeBSD ports (i.e. textproc/xalan-c) want
> xerces-c2 (which is 2.7.0). I try build xalan-c with the new xerces-c3 and
> see if it can handle the new header and libraries.
>
>>
>> I see three variants:
>> (1) simple: just mark these ports (c2 and c3) as conflicting,
>
> ... in my testcase I did.

And, for my personal taste, it is the best option.  Be close to
upstream as much as possible, IMHO, is the best way.

>> (2) semi-simple: split each xerces-c port at the two: run-time and
>> development.  Runtime contains a shered library, development contains
>> anything other.  Mark development parts as conflictitng.
>
> ... well, in such a case we converge much to the weird Linux mess, I guess.
>
>> (3) move each port away from each other's way: move headers into own
>> versioned deirectory (e.g. from include/xercesc/ to
>> insclude/xercesc-3.1/xercesc/), drop libxerces-c.so (if any -- I don't
>> know), rename pkg-config (.pc) file, and static library (if any), may
>> be something yet another, like documentation -- need to look at the
>> actual install.  All these changes hidden from the users through
>> pkg-config's .pc, therefore only one problem for developers will be
>> changed (non-standard name of the .pc file, i.e. pkg-config's module).
>
> ... this would bring up other complications for ports expecting libs and
> headers at places where the solo installation normally resides.
>
>>  But ATM I see no better way to allow parallel installation of the
>> packages that aren't intended for parallel installation by theirs
>> authors...
>
> I tend to install it as a unique port with conflicts activated. Hope there
> are no further conflicts other than xalan-c.

And I have some feelings that either existing xalan-c able to compile
against current xerces-c or there is newer version that able.

-- 
Andrew W. Nosenko <andrew.w.nosenko at gmail.com>