Re: Possible library versioning approach -- (evaluation requested)
Junichi Uekawa <dancer@netfort.gr.jp> writes:
> I think when you install, it should also generate libgwrap-wct.so
> symlink.
Actually. It *had* generated the symlink. I just wasn't thinking --
I had it stuck in my head that the library base name could only be
whatever was before the first "." in the library name. Anyway, thanks
very much for the help. It looks like I may be able to use this
approach to at least make sure at least g-wrap does the right thing.
Does anyone else think it would be a good or bad idea to consider as a
broader recommendation? Though it would make many library file names
a lot longer, if it worked right, it seems like it could avoid many of
the common library linkage problems where sub-library dependencies are
involved.
If nothing else, I'll probalby discuss with the other guile developers
aboud adding a recommendation that libraries that link against guile
put the libguile version in their soname...
Thanks again.
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
Reply to: