<div dir="auto"><div>The Clang module libraries are all called libClang[A-Z][a-zA-Z]+.{a,so}, so libclangcpp doesn't conflict with that, but I wonder if a dash would set it apart even more clearly: libclang-cpp. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Or something like clang-all to show that it houses all clang modules? </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Bikesheds are the best sheds. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">- Kim <br><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Jul 2, 2019, 10:44 Sylvestre Ledru <<a href="mailto:sylvestre@debian.org">sylvestre@debian.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>libclangcpp ?</p>
<p>I think it is a pretty common pattern.</p>
<p>On debian, apt-cache search 'lib.*cpp' returns a bunch of
libraries (libhdf5-cpp, libroscpp2d, libjsonrpccpp-dev,
libmysqlcppconn7v5,<br>
libsvncpp3, libtercpp0v5, libyaml-cpp-dev, etc)</p>
<p>S</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="m_-248227531401013401moz-cite-prefix">Le 02/07/2019 à 01:22, Chris Bieneman a
écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
The question is, what *should* it be called.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>While yes, the 's' in 'so' is shared, the "dylib"
and "dll" extensions on Darwin and Windows have the same meaning
too. The problem is libclang.so is already taken.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm not attached to the name in any way, so I'm open
to suggestions.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We do have documentation on best practices for how
to build distributions, which includes explanations of how to
pick and choose what you want to install (<a href="http://llvm.org/docs/BuildingADistribution.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://llvm.org/docs/BuildingADistribution.html</a>),
so you shouldn't need an option to disable it.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Chris</div>
<div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Jul 1, 2019, at 6:13 PM, Tom Stellard via
Phabricator <<a href="mailto:reviews@reviews.llvm.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">reviews@reviews.llvm.org</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="m_-248227531401013401Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<div>tstellar added a comment.<br>
<br>
In D61909#1563678 <<a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D61909#1563678" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://reviews.llvm.org/D61909#1563678</a>>,
@sylvestre.ledru wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">For now, it isn't part
of the debian packaging.<br>
<a href="https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-llvm-team/llvm-toolchain/blob/snapshot/debian/rules#L563" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-llvm-team/llvm-toolchain/blob/snapshot/debian/rules#L563</a><br>
it is removed as packaging phase as I have been told
it isn't ready.<br>
<br>
Anyway, the lib should not keep this name.<br>
By definition, on linux, .so means shared. It should
have a more explicit name.<br>
<br>
@beanz Can you please rename it? thanks<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
I've filed a bug for this and marked it as a blocker for
9.0.0, because once we ship a release with this name, it
will be harder to change: <a href="https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42475" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42475</a><br>
<br>
<br>
Repository:<br>
rC Clang<br>
<br>
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION<br>
<a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D61909/new/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://reviews.llvm.org/D61909/new/</a><br>
<br>
<a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D61909" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://reviews.llvm.org/D61909</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div></div>