[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Installation of JDK

> > This is probably a stupid question, but shouldn't libraries be built  

> > with backwards compatibility in mind?   
> The world isn't perfect, and sometimes mistakes were made and need to  

> be   
> corrected. When the soname (the bit at the end of the library   
> filename)   
> is changed, that indicates that compatibility has been broken for one  

> reason or another. You may not notice it most of the time, as the   
> change   
> may be in a rarely-used part of the library, but if anything ever does  

> call the thing that changed then it'll most likely crash immediately.  

Good point, i didn't think of that...   
> > Or perhaps we could ask Sun to simply build the SDK with forward   
> > compatibility in mind ? :-)   
> It's the standard C++ library, not Sun ...   
I was saying that perhaps Sun could have made   
the SDK work with future versions of that   
library. I don't even know if that's possible,   
i was just throwing out what seemed like a   
realistic idea at the time.   
> > I just looked at the libraries in my /usr/lib, and it would appear   
> > that many of them are linked to other libraries.   
> That's different. Those are probably either links from   
> /usr/lib/libfoo.so to /usr/lib/libfoo.so.1 (which are for use when   
> compiling other software dependent on those libraries, not when   
> running   
> it) or links to micro-versions of the libraries where the library   
> interface hasn't changed.   
Oh, ok. When my SDK breaks from linking   
libraries, i'll follow your advice.   

Reply to: