Re: Adding sha256 support into jigdo tools (jigdo and jigit)

["Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net>]

Hi,

Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Let's go with "-jigdo-checksum-algorithm" to keep the separation?

The user is king.


Other mail:
I proposed to keep versioning and SONAME at 1
> > LIBJTE1 {

Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Surely that works for upwards compatibility, but won't stop somebody
> from building and depending on the newer libjte2 then trying to run a
> binary with libjte1?

The only user of libjte already has precautions against this:

> > Fine check for compatibility happens at compile time by the required
> > minimum version (e.g. iso_libjte_req_* versus LIBJTE_VERSION_*) and
> > at run time by calling libjte__is_compatible().

This kind of test works well between e.g. xorriso's binary and libisoburn,
and then between libisoburn and libisofs.
The test between libisoburn/libisofs and libjte has never been challenged
but i am optimistic that it works.

The compile time test is at
  https://sources.debian.org/src/libisofs/1.5.0-1/libisofs/messages.c/#L157
(This is how i let a passive piece of source kick an unknown compiler:
  https://sources.debian.org/src/libisofs/1.5.0-1/libisofs/messages.c/#L174
)
Runtime test
  https://sources.debian.org/src/libisofs/1.5.0-1/libisofs/messages.c/#L180
Here i let libjte judge whether it finds its own version not older than the
compile time version seen by libisoburn (LIBJTE_VERSION_* from libjte.h).

As long as you stay with a plausible sequence of version numbers,
libjte__is_compatible() should not need your attention.
(For the curious:
  https://sources.debian.org/src/jigit/1.21-1/libjte/libjte.c/#L68
)


Have a nice day :)

Thomas