[aur-general] Structure and naming of packages

[Sven-Hendrik Haase]

On 06/15/2012 02:45 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> (I'm not sure if this post belongs here or perhaps to aur-dev, sorry
> for confusion.)
>
> Is there any convention regarding structure and naming of packages?
> I have a project implemented in C, which consist of a library and
> collection of utilities.
> In Debian world, this project is split across three packages:
> abc0 - library
> abc-bin - utilities
> abc-devel - headers and files for developers
>
> I'd like to create a package for Arch.
> How should I structure?
>
> Also, I'd like to have two variants of packages: one for latest stable release
> and one for development upstream hosted in SVN.
> Shall I use -svn suffix for the latter?
>
> I have checked the Wiki of ABS, Package Development category, etc.
> and I haven't found answer to my questions. Any pointers?
>
> Best regards,
First of all, Debian would call it libabc0 etc.

Then, name it exactly what upstream calls it. If upstream calls the lib
liblol, name it that. If they call it just lol, call it that. If you
make a svn variant, call it lol-svn. If you are unsure what upstream
calls it because they are inconsistent, make an educated guess judging
by the tarball name or something. Also, don't split packages like Debian
does. In your case, it would just be abc in Arch.