Re: libgailutil.so.16 -> libgailutil.so.17

[Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik sun com>]

On Fri, 26 Jul 2002, Owen Taylor wrote:

> 
> Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik Sun COM> writes:
> 
> > On 26 Jul 2002, jacob berkman wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 2002-07-26 at 14:15, Bill Haneman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > it's also true that
> > > > backwards-compatible changes will be happening in various libraries, and
> > > > in such cases we should bump the soname also, even though bincompat
> > > > (backwards, not forwards) is maintained.
> > > 
> > > either i am confused, or you are.
> > > 
> > > why would you change the soname for bin compat changes?
> > > 
> > 
> > It is very reasonable (or rather, it woud be pretty unreasonable not to)
> > do this if there werer new API additions. Its a pity that we have just one
> > level of versioning, so that an incompatible libgailutil will have to be
> > called libgailutil2.so
> 
> ELF versioning: 
> 
>  libfoo.so.1.0.0  == the filename of the library
>  libfoo.so.1      == the soname of the library, what get written into apps
>                      that link to it.

No - there is no need for the soname to contain the versioning in the form
of the .1 it can just as easily be libfoo.so and AFAIK all ELF linkers
allow you to specify this. If the library does not follow common naming /
versioning conventions (and libgalutil.so appears to be such) it just
another thing that needs to be explicitly handled by the maintainers.

>  libfoo.so        == symlink used for linking 

this is really just an artefact of the split-brain static library/shared
library world.

> 
> Non-ELF systems are sometimes similar, sometimes not, but ELF is what
> we really care most about for GNOME.
> 
> Regards,
>                                         Owen
> 

	Sander

	This is the place where all
	the junkies go	
	where time gets fast
	but everything gets slow