Re: i2c-tools: Discussion points about future library

[Martin Mokrejs <mmokrejs-08dBlVkRsZWoiTQjSSYKZesEoJ4y9sgM@public.gmane.org>]

One more: http://opensource.katalix.com/libi2c/

Martin Mokrejs wrote:
> Hi,
>   did you Google for it? Looks "libi2c" is already existing.
> 
> http://www.rtems.com/ml/rtems-users/2008/march/msg00033.html
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=libi2c-dev
> 
>   I would also search for the header filenames and invent such names
> which will not clash with any existing. Same for "-li2c" or
> whatever will apear on the ld line.
> Martin
> 
> Jean Delvare wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 18:41:58 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:01:13PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
>>>
>>>> First point is the name of the library. My original intent was to name
>>>> it libi2c-dev, because the library is essentially a front-end to the
>>>> i2c-dev kernel driver, and also because this is what Debian named their
>>>> package currently containing the (i2c-tools flavor of)
>>>> <linux/i2c-dev.h>. However Aur??lien Jarno suggested that libi2c would
>>>> be just as fine, and easier/shorter. I am mostly convinced by now. I am
>>>> curious if anyone wants to express an opinion on the matter?
>>>
>>> FWIW the Debian convention is that the source package of a library is
>>> called libfoo building packages libfoo-dev with the headers and .so
>>> symlink to link against (or .a for a static library) and libfooN with
>>> the runtime in it (where N is the soname).
>>
>> Oh, OK, so I completely misinterpreted the -dev. I am used to -devel
>> for development packages (openSUSE) so the connection did not happen in
>> my brain. Of course it makes sense now.
>>
>> So I guess I'll name the library libi2c.
>>
>> Thanks,