hi, i'm currently considering all the options for creating the Debian packages of faust2, and stumbled upon the "dynamic" build target, that builds libfaust.so and friends. In Debian we generally prefer dynamic libraries over static linking for various reasons, among them: - GPL compliance (if we distribute a binary that statically links a third party library under the GPL, we are obliged to keep the very code of the third party library as long as we distribute the consumer.) - bug-fixing/security: one nice thing about shared libraries is, that if a bug is discovered in the library, we simply have to recompile that library and the fix will propagate automatically to all consumers. with static linking, we need to re-link each and every consumer with the fixed library (basically triggering a re-build of the entire consumer)
for this to work, the dynamic library is required to: - have a reasonably stable ABI - use semantic versioning in the soname i see that libOSCFaust.so seems to use soversioning (though I'm not sure whether its only pretending to), but libfaust.so appears to not to. so my question is: does it make sense to use the libfaust dynamic libraries at all? how stable is the ABI (leaving aside the inherent problems of C++ ABIs...)? how about using semantic versioning? gmfdsar IOhannes
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ Faudiostream-devel mailing list Faudiostream-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/faudiostream-devel
