Bug#34610: unsuffixed shared libraries
Kai Henningsen wrote:
> email@example.com (Stephan Kulow) wrote on 15.03.99 in <36ED4718.5300688F@kde.org>:
> > Package: dpkg-dev
> > Version: 188.8.131.52
> > MICO (www.mico.org) doesn't use so versions, but always puts the
> > full version into the library file name. An example result of ldd is:
> > coolo:~> ldd /usr/bin/idl
> > libmico2.2.3.so => /usr/lib/libmico2.2.3.so (0x4001b000)
> I'd say that's a mico bug. It should not do that. Someone hasn't
> understood how shared libraries work.
> I don't think any other package should be changed to cope with this
> particular misbehaviour.
Why should this be a misbehaviour? If you do it that way, you make
sure that it the version dependencies work on every system even with
static libraries. It may be that this is unusual, but I can't see this
as a bug of mico!
As long as Linux remains a religion of freeware fanatics,
Microsoft have nothing to worry about.
By Michael Surkan, PC Week Online