On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 05:16:31PM -0400, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
While I agree with you, and have started the petitioning process, I'd
still really appreciate suggestions on what SONAME to use for the
package between now and such time as upstream adopts a SONAME.
Don't invent one at all. By
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 05:16:31PM -0400, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
While I agree with you, and have started the petitioning process, I'd
still really appreciate suggestions on what SONAME to use for the
package between now and such time as upstream adopts a SONAME.
Don't invent one at all. By
Hi,
I'm under the impression that any shared library *must* have
a SONAME. I can't find that precise statement in the policy
manual, but section 11.3 says the package must be named
librarynamesoversion.
If true, what is the procedure for packaging, say Inventor, that
builds two shared libs
I'm under the impression that any shared library *must* have
a SONAME.
Yes, but SONAME just means the name of the .so file. Policy uses
this term incorrectly to refer to the extension of the soname.
Saying that a shared library must have a SONAME is then equivalent
to saying that it must have
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 02:30:49PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm under the impression that any shared library *must* have
a SONAME.
Yes, but SONAME just means the name of the .so file.
OK, now I'm truly confused.
I thought a SONAME was something embedded into the shared object
Yes, but SONAME just means the name of the .so file.
OK, now I'm truly confused.
I thought a SONAME was something embedded into the shared object
file. As I understand things, the SONAME is completely independent of
the file name, at least in principle.
It's not quite that simple.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 03:18:56PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but SONAME just means the name of the .so file.
OK, now I'm truly confused.
I thought a SONAME was something embedded into the shared object
file. As I understand things, the SONAME is completely independent
That is a nice, rational versioning scheme, I agree.
I don't see how it fits in this discussion, though. For one thing,
I'm not using libtool.
But all shared libraries are recommended to follow this convention.
So I guess I'm still searching for the answer to my original questions:
1.
Hi Steve,
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
I thought a SONAME was something embedded into the shared object
file. As I understand things, the SONAME is completely independent of
the file name, at least in principle.
It's not quite that simple.
There's a good
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 04:41:53PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is a nice, rational versioning scheme, I agree.
I don't see how it fits in this discussion, though. For one thing,
I'm not using libtool.
But all shared libraries are recommended to follow this convention.
So
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 03:50:47PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
So I guess I'm still searching for the answer to my original questions:
1. Does Debian require a SONAME for a shared lib?
Yes, although this may not be spelled out clearly in
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 03:50:47PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
So I guess I'm still searching for the answer to my original questions:
1. Does Debian require a SONAME for a shared lib?
Yes,
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 05:06:58PM -0400, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
1. Does Debian require a SONAME for a shared lib?
You mean the tag inside the library itself?
Yes.
All of the shared libraries I have installed on my machine have an
embedded SONAME tag. I thought this was
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 06:18:04PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
I think the confusion here is between a SONAME and a library version number.
Typically, the library version number is part of the SONAME. What we are
speaking of here is libraries which do not have a version number in their
Yes, but SONAME just means the name of the .so file.
OK, now I'm truly confused.
I thought a SONAME was something embedded into the shared object
file. As I understand things, the SONAME is completely independent of
the file name, at least in principle.
It's not quite that simple.
Hi Steve,
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
I thought a SONAME was something embedded into the shared object
file. As I understand things, the SONAME is completely independent of
the file name, at least in principle.
It's not quite that simple.
There's a good
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 03:50:47PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
So I guess I'm still searching for the answer to my original questions:
1. Does Debian require a SONAME for a shared lib?
Yes, although this may not be spelled out clearly in
17 matches
Mail list logo
