Hi Scott, Scott Cantor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BTW, I'd have to double check, but I think your makefile is broken > regardless. If you're intending that it generate something like > libxerces-c.so.30.0, I think it's not doing that now. Currently we simply pass the '-revision 3.0' option to libtool and it decides where to stick it. I personally don't see much difference between naming the library libxerces-c-3.0.so or libxerces-c.so.3.0. Either way the version number is embedded into the name. I did some more thinking about -version-info vs -revision. I think I now understand things better and we can do it either way. With -version-info, the version passed will be different from the release version. Because Xerces-C++ release numbers are governed by the interface compatibility (e.g., major releases are backwards- incompatible, minor releases are interface-compatible but not binary compatible, and build releases are binary compatible), the age component will always be 0. As a result, I don't see much benefit from using a more complex -version-info over the simpler -release. For the reference, here are the possible release transitions with the corresponding -version-info changes: 3.0.0 -> 3.0.1 (binary-compatible) 3:0:0 -> 3:1:0 3.0.1 -> 3.1.0 (not binary-compatible) 3:1:0 -> 4.0.0 3.1.0 -> 4.0.0 4:0:0 -> 5.0.0 Another drawback of using -version-info is that we will have to somehow replicate this in the ICU message id which currently looks like this: xercesc_messages_3_0. Boris -- Boris Kolpackov, Code Synthesis Tools Open source XML data binding for C++: http://codesynthesis.com/products/xsd Mobile/embedded validating XML parsing: http://codesynthesis.com/products/xsde --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
