Re: at-spi versioning

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 06:17, Bill Haneman wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 16:41, Owen Taylor wrote:
> ...
> 
> > OK, I didn't quite catch the question. So, the problem is that
> > you accidentally had some release with sonames of 1.0.x surrounded
> > by other release with sonames of 0.x.y?
> > 
> > Looking at Red Hat releases I see:
> > 
> >  Red Hat 8.0 - at-spi 1.0.1, libspi.so.1.0.0
> >  Red Hat 9   - at-spi 1.1.9, libspi.so.0.8.0
> > 
> > Not good :-), but then again, at-spi isn't a platform library
> > for Red Hat so it isn't a big deal for us either way.
> > 
> > For people upgrading through RPM's, the old .so.1.0.0 will
> > be removed, so everything will work fine.
> 
> What about dependency management via RPMs?  i.e. if someone is
> installing a gnopernicus RPM, is the RPM dependency scheme smart enough
> to check for at-spi version numbers rather than .soname ?

If you have a gnopericus RPM the autocomputed dependency will
be on 'libspi.so.0' rather than on at-spi >= X.Y.Z.

Which should work fine. If you have libspi.so.1 on your computer,
the binaries in that package won't work on it.

If gnopernicus uses features that were introduced in some particular
vesion of at-spi, then the RPM creator needs to list that dependency
specifically:

 Requires: at-spi >= 1.1.9

in the 'spec file'

I hope that answers your question,
                                             Owen