Re: Library interface version question
Henning Makholm wrote:
>Scripsit Shachar Shemesh <email@example.com>
>>First, if I understand correctly, programs linked against this new
>>library (which should still be called "libargtable2-0") should have a
>>specific ">=" version in their dependencies. This does not currently
>You are supposed to write an appropriate shlibs file, as described in
>policy §8.6. Have you done so?
My file is currently automatically generated by dh_shlibdeps, and says
"libargtable2 0 libargtable2-0". I realize that I should place any
version restrictions there, if I want them. The question is whether I
should just state the version at which the interface advance there, or
whether I should do some other version tricks?
>Why? This does not happen with the libraries with three-part version
>numbers that I have on my system.
In a nutshell - because then the information regarding which backwards
compatible interface to use is lost. I guess it's ok IF it is not
possible for a given interface version to be backwards compatible in
some versions but not in others.