[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Possible library versioning approach -- (evaluation requested)

On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 12:24:21PM -0600, Rob Browning wrote:
> 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.

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.

Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Reply to: