Sorry for replying late .... :-))
: Thanks for the pointer. Note the following paragraph regarding the use
: of -release:
: : Note that this option causes a modification of the library name, so
: : do not use it unless you want to break binary compatibility with any
: : past library releases. In general, you should only use `-release' for
: : package-internal libraries or for ones whose interfaces change very
: : frequently.
: This means that, whenever libtabe changes its release name (ie.
: libtabe-0.2.5, libtabe-0.2.6, etc), binary compatibility would break
: anyway. (xcin now links to libtabe-0.2.4.so.0 in any case.) Therefore,
: I think the package should be called libtabe0.2.4.
: I'll consult with other Debian developers about the package naming.
Yes, I see the problem.
Sorry that I don't have a good experience to name the library.
What do you suggest for the naming rule which could also compatible
to the naming rule of libtool?
The problem is, since libtabe includes both the library part and
the tsi.src (the database of Tsi's), and some utilities. It may be
happen that in the new release even though the library interface/
internal itself does not change at all, but only the tsi.src changes.
In any case the version number of the libtabe should increase, but
not the libtabe interface version number. So, how to solve this?
This is my main reason to use this naming style:
libtabe version number libtabe interface number
But this may not be a good solution. So I want to hear about your
Oh! Maybe we could follow the way of the glibc. Take a look at
ls -l /lib/libc*:
/lib/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.2.4.so
and the applicaion which links to libc is, say:
THH:thhk7 $ ldd /bin/ls
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x4001c000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000)
Maybe we could create:
libtabe.so.0 -> libtabe-0.2.4.so.0.2.0
and let xcin depends on libtabe.so.0.
What do you think? :-))
: > So, if you want to keep the most updated/maybe bug free source
: > code, please get the source of BOTH xcin & libtabe from the CVS.
: OK, but it would be better if, for example, fixes for 0.2.4 are branched
: or tagged with 0-2-4, etc, instead of in CVS Head. But this is only a
: suggestion. :)
OK, I will add a tage when I have time. Thanks for your suggestion :-))