Re: PAM still a goal for slink?
On Thu, 03 Sep, 1998, Steve Dunham wrote:
> If we bump a pre-1.0 version to a soname of libpam.so.1, Red Hat might
> not be entirely happy with not having a soname which matches the
> program version when PAM 1.0 comes out.
Technical note: Version number and SO NAME are indepent, there is NO NEED to
keep them in sync, sometime people get obsesd with keeping them the same and
release binary incompatible libaries with the same SO name because they want
to keep it in sync with the version. Not naming names but I think this
happened to imlib once, forgive me if I am mistaken.