[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Using libtool -release versus -version-info breaks packages (ITS#3035)
At 09:35 AM 3/23/2004, email@example.com wrote:
>> It was (is) allowing incompatible versions of the libraries
>> to be picked up dynamically (which is causing the usual
>There are ways to address that. See below.
Your comments focus mostly on how to avoid making incompatible
changes. However, there will be incompatible changes. We
need to ensure that when multiple libraries are available to the
dynamic linker that incorrect ones are not chosen. This is
what using -release does for us.
The only alternative that seems acceptable, if it where
technically feasible, is to have per-minor release major
interface numbers that update normally within a minor
release, but updated by some step between minor releases.
That is, 2.2 would use numbers like:
20201, 20202, 20203, ...
(where the least significant digit was tied to interface
changes, not patch numbers).
and 2.3 would use numbers like:
20301, 20302, 20303, ...
and 3.0 would use numbers like:
30001, 30002, 30003, ...
However, this does not appear to be technical feasible as
1) libtool restrictions,
2) dynamic linker restrictions.
Now, you say there are not problems with dynamic linkers.
However, I have my doubts here. I rather not make the
assumption that 1) is okay until the libtool community
was convinced that it was okay and hence lifted 2).