Re: [FWD] Re: [Jackit-devel] parallel installs to die
On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 15:36 +0100, Free Ekanayaka wrote:
> I'm sorry but I have to bother you again with the versioning issue of
> the jack package.
> Here below is a copy of the reply I sent to Paul Davis on the Jack
> mailing list. It seems that this issue is making life harder for
> people wanting to compile and run bleeding-edge versions of jack.
> Is there some kind of compromise we could reach?
The original versioning scheme was decided upon by Junichi and me mainly
due to lines 40-42 in the configure.ac file. The policy was stressed
many times on the jack mailing list.
http://jackit.cvs.sourceforge.net/jackit/jack/configure.ac?revision=1.84&view=markup
30 dnl ---
31 dnl HOWTO: updating the libjack interface version
32 dnl
33 dnl current = incremented whenever the public libjack API is changed
34 dnl revision = incremented when the libjack implementation is changed
35 dnl age = current libjack is both source and binary compatible with
36 dnl libjack interfaces current,current-1,...,current-age
37 dnl
38 dnl Note! see libtool documentation for detailed documentation
39 dnl
40 dnl Note Also! until we reach CURRENT>=1, the rules are somewhat
41 dnl slacker than this, and closer to those for the JACK version
42 dnl number.
43 dnl ---
44 JACK_API_CURRENT=0
45 JACK_API_REVISION=23
46 JACK_API_AGE=0
The only reliant verioning information then is the actual version
number. The additional problem is that libjack has _two_ interfaces
which are versioned. The one between the clients and the lib and the one
between the server and the clients (acting via the lib).
If the versioning is now as strict as the HOWTO specifies, the actual
soname can be used for the package name.
Robert.
--
Robert Jördens <jordens@debian.org>
Reply to: