> Since we have current customers with dependencies upon
> our existing package name and version, we do not like that
> solution.
The user-facing programs would still remain in a binary package named 'cxlflash' and installing this package should give the expected combination of runtime components. But a package accepted into the Debian or Ubuntu archives needs to comply with Debian/Ubuntu policy for libraries. There are sound technical reasons that this policy exists.
> Since we have current customers with dependencies upon
> our existing package name and version, we do not like that
> solution.
The user-facing programs would still remain in a binary package named 'cxlflash' and installing this package should give the expected combination of runtime components. But a package accepted into the Debian or Ubuntu archives needs to comply with Debian/Ubuntu policy for libraries. There are sound technical reasons that this policy exists.