Re: [gtk-list] Re: gtk+-971201

[Kenneth Albanowski <kjahds kjahds com>]

On Tue, 2 Dec 1997, Jay Painter wrote:

> Here's a guess: I made a change to gtk+/gtk's Makefile.am.  It had been
> hacked at some point so that the shared library version was 1:0:  now, I
> thought that libtool default blanks to 0, but so I changed it back to read
> 1:0:0   I didn't mention this because I thought it defaulted to 0, and
> therefore libgtk.so.1.0.0, but maybe you have some libs which are
> libgtk.so.1.0, which are not symbolic links, but are the older gtk libs.

Actually, it would be a good idea to bump the revision number up each
time. This set of problems sounds awfully like the libraries are getting
confused. 

-- 
Kenneth Albanowski (kjahds@kjahds.com, CIS: 70705,126)