Hi Filip, On Sat, 28 Apr 2001, Filip Van Raemdonck wrote:
> (Please cc: me on replies, I'm trying to subscribe but the mailing list > seems to be slow in sending confirm requests) > Hi, > I am working on a package of fam (available from > http://oss.sgi.com/projects/fam/), and I have some trouble wrt libtool. > They use a selfcontained version of libtool in the build process, to build a > shared library. The resulting library gets named libfam.so.0.0.0 > This seemed rather odd to me, as the source distribution is already at 2.6.4 > (it's an opensource release of an old SGI Irix tool), and I was correct in > being suspicious: in a rpm spec file distributed with the sources there were > commented out lines in the `%files' section that referenced a libfam.1.0 file > (but a comment also seemed to indicate failure of correct soname generation > on rpm systems). > I suspect this is probably just a problem with the way libtool gets called > (either incorrect or incomplete), but I'm not too good on reading > Makefile.in's and apparently (to make things even more complicated) the > libtool isn't even really distributed but gets generated from a file > `ltconfig' in the top source directory. > I'd really like some help to build the library with a correct major and minor > version number. It's not that I can't build it or it doesn't work right now, > but I fear severe breakage if one of the version numbers changes. It's not out of the question that a library which is released as version 2.6.4 would still have an so version of 0.0.0; the major version of the library soname changes any time the library interface changes, but the major version of the /package/ would change at the author's discretion. Still, even though it doesn't need to match the release version 2.6.4, 0.0.0 does seem a little low. If you search through the makefiles for 'soname', do you find anywhere that this argument is being passed to libtool (or supposed to be)? Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
