On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 12:51:01PM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Andreas Fester wrote:
>
> >If upstream is unwilling to change the SONAME each time the binary
> >compatibility breaks, then IMHO the only choice is that you do it
> >yourself for the Debian package. Otherwise trouble begins when other
> >packages within the Debian archive start linking against your library.
> >See also http://www.trolltech.com/developer/faqs/index.html?catid=&id=362
> >for what breaks binary compatibility of C++ libraries.
> >
> That doesn't make sense. If I start inventing my own SO versions, I'll
> be in trouble should upstream change their mind some time in the future.
>
> What I thought was to use "0" as SO version, which is a standard way to
> state that the interface is not guarenteed to remain stable. I'll also
> add a comment to readme.Debian to the effect that, when linking against
> the library, you should include the precise version number in the
> dependencies.
Another alternative is not providing a shared library, only a static
one, at least until upstream has come to their senses and made a stable
library with a proper soname.
--
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <guus@sliepen.eu.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature