OK. If you don't mind, I'd like to test my understanding of libraries. Assuming I do have the binary incompatibility that I expect in QOF: (where the next release of libqof is binary incompatible with current and libqofsql is compatible but has been modified internally with new code:) The old "badly-named" package qof-0.5.0-2 has : libqof.so SONAME = libqof-0.5.0.so.1 libqofsql.so SONAME = libqofsql-0.5.0.so.1 qof-0.pc (the script for pkg-config) -I/usr/include/qof/include/ (part of --cflags output) -lqof -lqofsql (part of --libs output) libqof-0.5.0-1_0.5.0-2_i386.deb (Yuk!) libqof-dev_0.5.0-2_i386.deb libqof-0.5.0-1-dbg_0.5.0-2_i386.deb When I go to qof-0.6.0, should I have: libqof.so.2.0.0 (or should that be libqof1.so.1.0.0 ? ) libqofsql.so.1.1.0 qof-1.pc -I/usr/include/qof1/include/ -lqof1 -lqofsql libqof1_0.6.0-1_i386.deb libqof1-dev_0.6.0-1_i386.deb ( ditto ) ? I'm not sure about whether to put this version alongside 0.5.0 - there are large amounts of new code and new functionality as well as the removal of a few deprecated functions - but the majority of the code has only been tweaked, some is unchanged. What determines whether a library replaces / conflicts with the old version or simply sits alongside? (Do I need to create a debug symbols package?) (I'm the upstream developer and co-maintainer for the Debian packages so I can make any desired output appear.) Nothing has been uploaded anywhere yet and a lot of the current version data isn't in the QOF CVS either - until I know it's right. The source code for the library itself is in current project CVS. http://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=83302 cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/qof co qof -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpS_tTyT0w9P.pgp
Description: PGP signature