Re: Possible library versioning approach -- (evaluation requested)
Daniel Jacobowitz <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> 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.
My problem is that it doesn't seem like "paying attention" is
sufficient. If I don't put the relevant sub-library name/versions
into libgwrap-glib's soname, then which of the other approaches would
you favor, the configure-time integer soname lookup table, the hybrid
name and table approach where you would have a name of libgwrap-glib-1
and the soname would be chosen from the sub-lib-collection lookup
table, the placement of the sub-lib names/versions into
libgwrap-glib's name, or something else?
Don't forget the complication that gwrap (and I presume other libs)
needs to be able to build safely against guile 1.3.4, 1.4, or 1.6, and
*should* be able to build against either glib 1.2 or 2.0.
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4