Re: Possible library versioning approach -- (evaluation requested)
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 12:24:21PM -0600, Rob Browning wrote:
> Junichi Uekawa <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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
I'm dubious. "A lot longer" is a bit of an understatement, if you look
at the number of shared libraries some programs use... there is no
substitute for actually paying attention to compatibility.
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer