Hi Kurt
On 02.07.2004, at 20:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I may have miss interpreted what Chris01 said. The discussion here with Chris gave me that impression:
Yes, indeed, i thought that was the case. But i might be wrong. Let's see what the other developers have to say.
It is quite normal for the number in the filename to differ from the number in the compatibility version.
For example, if you have libfoo.0.dylib and libfoo.0.0.0.dylib etc. built with libtool you will find that there is a compat version of 1. GNU libtool always adds 1 to the compat version because ld does not like "-compatibility_version 0"..
Now Kurt says that 26:0:6 is the number passed to gnulibtool, so that means it has an age of 6, so it should be numbered 20 in the file name (26 - 6 = 20), and 26 would be the compat version if we did not have to add 1 to satisfy the darwin linker. So you end up with a libfoo.20.dylib and libfoo.20.6.0.dylib, this is perfectly proper and should not be modified.
Peter -- Peter O'Gorman - http://www.pogma.com
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
