[Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#637787: Bug#637787: Bug#637787: Bug#637787: Bug#637787: Bug#637787: Bug#637787: trivial fix

[John W. Eaton]

On  1-Sep-2011, Thomas Weber wrote:

| On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:24:17PM -0400, John W. Eaton wrote:
| 
| > Is the current problem that the libraries are placed in a directory
| > that has a version number in the name, or does dpkg-shlibeps not find
| > files in subdirectories of /usr/lib at all?
| 
| That's a good question; I'm not really sure. 
| I don't think however, that the version should be in the installation
| path - what happens when 3.4.3 comes around?
| You should take my words on this with a grain of salt, though. I'm new
| to it myself.

I agree that if the shared libraries contain proper version
information, then the package version number should not be a part of
the name of the library directory.  I asked about whether the
libraries could go in a subdirectory because I think it would be
better to have them installed in /usr/lib/octave instead of /usr/lib.
Looking at /usr/lib on my Debian system, there seem to be a number of
other packages that use subdirectories for library files, so maybe it
is OK?

jwe