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.
(==timothy==)
Reply to: