[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-158?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=43088#action_43088
]
Daniel Pocock commented on AMQCPP-158:
--------------------------------------
I support the latter: no release option, and version-info = 3:0:0
If ActiveMQ-CPP is ONLY accessed through the CMS 1.2 API, then the ABI version
only needs to change when the CMS API changes. The revision number (in the
middle) would be the only thing incremented for any other change within
ActiveMQ-CPP itself.
If, however, people can use ActiveMQ-CPP classes directly (e.g. instantiation
of objects defined in the ActiveMQ-CPP headers), then the ABI version would
have to reflect changes in ActiveMQ-CPP itself.
> libtool release and version-info arguments need to be set correctly
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AMQCPP-158
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-158
> Project: ActiveMQ C++ Client
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.1.2
> Environment: Debian
> Reporter: Daniel Pocock
> Assignee: Nathan Mittler
> Fix For: 2.2
>
>
> When make is invoked, libtool is asked to build the library with this command
> line:
> /bin/sh ../../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=link g++ -ansi -pedantic -W -Wall
> -fPIC -fstrict-aliasing -Wstrict-aliasing=2 -Wno-long-long -g -O2
> -version-info 2:1:2 -release 2.1.2 -o libactivemq-cpp.la -rpath /usr/lib
> activemq/core/libactivemq_cpp_la-ActiveMQConsumer.lo ...........
> Notice the `-release 2.1.2' argument to libtool? Using a unique release
> number with each build means that applications will only run with one
> specific build, and no others.
> Perhaps `-release 2' might be more appropriate? This would mean that an
> application that expects version 2.1.1 would still be willing to link with
> 2.2.0 (for example) at runtime. Alternatively, it may be better to omit the
> release argument, and just use version-info.
> The -version-info argument allows more fine-grained control - however, it is
> not meant to be written as MAJOR:MINOR:REVISION. The three values mean
> `version:revision:age', where:
> - version = ABI version, an integer that is increment whenever binary
> compatibility changes
> - revision = implementation (this number is incremented when there is a code
> change that does not impact the binary interface)
> - age = how many previous versions are binary compatible, e.g if age = 2,
> then version, (version - 1) and (version - 2) are all binary compatible - the
> age value specified for this library (2) suggests that it is binary
> compatible to the original version (0).
> ABI version numbers are not the same as product version numbers. If the
> product number is 2.1.2, that does not mean the -version-info argument is
> 2:1:2.
> I have created some pages on the wiki to discuss version and packaging
> issues; these issues need to be agreed upon by the community before a version
> scheme can be implemented in the build system.
> I am willing to work on the details and contribute a patch for this once
> there has been some consensus on which is the best versioning scheme to adopt
> and what level of binary compatibility is expected.
> Wiki pages:
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AMQCPP/ActiveMQ-CPP+product+version+number
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AMQCPP/ActiveMQ-CPP%2C+libtool+and+packaging+notes
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
