Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-12 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Michel Briand wrote: Does anyone uses 10 or 16 to refer to their ABI ? Hum... So those numbers have to be managed somewhere... If developers and users are ok with X.Y.Z then the CURRENT, REVISION and AGE is a different scheme to learn and to implement in the build system:

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hello Joseph, * Joseph Garvin wrote on Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 11:32:31PM CEST: I read a description of libtool's versioning here: http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Updating-version-info.html What's confusing to me is that this way of handling versioning doesn't seem to

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Michel Briand
Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de - Tue, 11 Aug 2009 19:34:09 +0200 Hello Michel, * Michel Briand wrote on Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 12:46:00AM CEST: Personally I've always seen interface as a contract. A contract between a library writer and library user. Yes. Why does libtool want to

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* Michel Briand wrote on Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 07:53:50PM CEST: Yes non-Linux system will have a different scheme. But if libtool wants to help I'm sure a little more documentation could easier the task :). # create shared lib mylib_la_LDFLAGS = -version-info $(MYLIB_LTVERSION) This last

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Charles Wilson
Michel Briand wrote: This last variable is crafted crafted? This is your mistake. to reflect the usual versioning. I.e. if I want the version to 1.22.5, Why? Why do you CARE what the internal ABI version number is? It's just a tag; you shouldn't care WHAT it is, only that it changes ONLY

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Michel Briand
Charles Wilson libt...@cwilson.fastmail.fm - Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:50:33 -0400 Michel Briand wrote: This last variable is crafted crafted? This is your mistake. to reflect the usual versioning. I.e. if I want the version to 1.22.5, Why? Why do you CARE what the internal ABI version number

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Charles Wilson
Michel Briand wrote: Thank you, but, sorry, I'm not convinced. Remember what I said a few mails ago: that's all of interface contract = same concept as your... Does anyone uses 10 or 16 to refer to their ABI ? Hum... So those numbers have to be managed somewhere... Yes. Here are a few

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Michel Briand
The whole story is that I never wanted to use libtool in the first place. And, now, I know why :). ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Michel Briand
Sorry for my last post : too quick answer :)) Charles Wilson cyg...@cwilson.fastmail.fm - Tue, 11 Aug 2009 16:45:58 -0400 Michel Briand wrote: Thank you, but, sorry, I'm not convinced. Remember what I said a few mails ago: that's all of interface contract = same concept as your... Does

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Vincent Torri
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Michel Briand wrote: I've looked into many OSS and found in Makefile.am only 2 cases : - version-info 1:0:0 (the guys there didn't want to bother with libtool versioning apparently... ;)) - version-info with the X.Y.Z version back crafted to make the soname version

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Daniel Herring
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Michel Briand wrote: Please give me the way to learn those ABI number you cite. I've looked into many OSS and found in Makefile.am only 2 cases : - version-info 1:0:0 (the guys there didn't want to bother with libtool versioning apparently... ;)) - version-info with the

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Charles Wilson
Michel Briand wrote: libavutil49-0.4.9-3.pre1.8994.2plf2008.0 ABI=49, pkgver=0.4.9 Please give me the way to learn those ABI number you cite. libavutil49-0.4.9-stuff ^^ is usually used by the distribution (Red Hat? Debian?) to indicate that

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* Vincent Torri wrote on Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:33:47AM CEST: if i'm not mistaken, you can compute le libtool versioning from the version of the software. If the version of the software is X.Y.Z, the libtool version can be computed with : (X+Y).Z.Y No, it can not, for two reasons: 1) the

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Vincent Torri
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Vincent Torri wrote on Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:33:47AM CEST: if i'm not mistaken, you can compute le libtool versioning from the version of the software. If the version of the software is X.Y.Z, the libtool version can be computed with :

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* Vincent Torri wrote on Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 07:15:16AM CEST: On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Vincent Torri wrote on Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:33:47AM CEST: if i'm not mistaken, you can compute le libtool versioning from the version of the software. If the version of the

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-11 Thread Vincent Torri
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Vincent Torri wrote on Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 07:15:16AM CEST: On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Vincent Torri wrote on Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:33:47AM CEST: if i'm not mistaken, you can compute le libtool versioning from the version

libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-05 Thread Joseph Garvin
be in C (where you only have structs so all members are public)? Though if that were the case it seems like you'd have to pessimistically assume ABI is always broken which doesn't sound right either.. How does libtool versioning handle ABI breakage

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-05 Thread Bruce Korb
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Joseph Garvinjoseph.h.gar...@gmail.com wrote: I read a description of libtool's versioning here: http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Updating-version-info.html What's confusing to me is that this way of handling versioning doesn't seem to pay

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-05 Thread Joseph Garvin
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Bruce Korb bk...@gnu.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Joseph Garvinjoseph.h.gar...@gmail.com wrote: I read a description of libtool's versioning here: http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Updating-version-info.html What's

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-05 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Bruce Korb wrote: Those surely sound like rule 4 to me: If any interfaces have been added, removed, or changed since the last update, increment current, and set revision to 0. changing structures or funtional interfaces (inline functions), surely is an interface change.

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-05 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Joseph Garvin wrote: ... But that still doesn't make sense. If I only add (don't remove functions or change existing signatures) to my interfaces, I still bump the current number according to that rule. But adding to an interface doesn't necessarily break ABI. So if

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-05 Thread Michel Briand
Joseph Garvin joseph.h.gar...@gmail.com - Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:02:18 -0500 On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Bruce Korb bk...@gnu.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Joseph Garvinjoseph.h.gar...@gmail.com wrote: I read a description of libtool's versioning here:

Re: libtool versioning and ABI

2009-08-05 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Michel Briand wrote: Personally I've always seen interface as a contract. A contract between a library writer and library user. The API is the compile-time contract and the ABI is the run-time contract. Since it's a contract, ABI changes fall into the contract agreement.