Re: libusb...

[Junichi Uekawa <dancer@netfort.gr.jp>]

"Adam Majer" <adamm@galacticasoftware.com> cum veritate scripsit:

> > I don't know what the guy tries to mean here, but it is probably
> > a library under the name of "libusb-0.1"
> > With a soversion of 4
> 
> Yeah, IMO that soname is screwed up. It should be libusb.so.1.4 or whatever.
> At least <libname>.so.<version> with version to whatever degree necessary to 
> keep ABI complience between different releases/uploads of the library.

No, it should be something like

libusb.so.4

But many people dislike sonames being a high number,
thus like the leisure of re-setting the number.

Also, it allows different development libraries, I believe
with libusb-0.1.so.4, you can link in libraries with "-lusb-0.1"
and it can coexist easily with "libusb-0.2" which may be sourcewise
very incompatible.

GNOME seems to be managed in that philosophy, it is taking
the idea of sonames to a next step.

The only problem being that not many people understand its 
implications, and mechanisms.



regards,
	junichi

-- 
dancer@debian.org : Junichi Uekawa   http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423  7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4