should libcantorlibs really be a public library

Filipe Saraiva filipe at
Thu Mar 12 13:45:39 UTC 2015

On 12-03-2015 10:36, Harald Sitter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Albert Astals Cid <aacid at> wrote:
>> El Dimarts, 10 de març de 2015, a les 16:15:48, Harald Sitter va escriure:
>>> Ahoy,
>>> I am looking at the debian packaging of cantor right now and noticed
>>> that it doesn't actually package the headers, nor the .so symlink  of
>>> libcantorlibs.
>>> It makes me wonder whether the library really should be public at all?
>> It's a chicken egg problem, no?
>> You won't users unless your library is installed and if you don't install the
>> library because there's no users...
> Sure. Hence my question. If it is public because it is believed to be
> useful to the world, and getting proper public library treatment
> (so-version management and what not), then Debian (I really care about
> Kubuntu here :P) should package the development related files. Right
> now they are not packaged but installed by cmake which seems like a
> problem in either case.
> HS

Hello Harald, in fact libcantor needs to be more "visible" for
developers take advantage of that. It needs a proper documentation page,
for example.

But you relate a Debian/Kubuntu packaging problem, not a Cantor problem.
I am using Mageia and I can see a package named cantor-devel here.

I suggest to you open a bug report in Debian or Kubuntu bugzilla to
relate it.


Filipe Saraiva

More information about the kde-edu mailing list