On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 02:38:48PM -0500, Kirk Strauser wrote:
> At 2003-10-01T18:43:39Z, Matthew Seaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > Ideally that should occur only when there is an incompatible change to the
> > ABI (application binary interface) provided by the library, and not as
> > some sort of parallel to the package version number.
> 
> It was my understanding that they bumped the version number to reflect an
> incompatible change to the ABI.

That is probably the case, for some value of "incompatible".  I must
admit that I have no direct knowledge of exactly why the shlib version
number was bumped.  However it was decided, the ABI for libintl.so
seems to be remarkably mutable: strange therefore that all of the
software that depends on that library seems to recompile against the
new shlib version completely smoothly and that it seems to be possible
to futz the shlib version issue by creating appropriate symlinks...

        Cheers,

        Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                       26 The Paddocks
                                                      Savill Way
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey         Marlow
Tel: +44 1628 476614                                  Bucks., SL7 1TH UK

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to