Looks good but you already committed this anyway :) Brice
Le 08/11/2010 15:17, Jeff Squyres a écrit : > Short version: > -------------- > > According to Libtool docs, I think the 1.0.3 .so version number should be > 0:2:0. > > Can someone verify/sanity check this? > > More details: > ------------- > > Here's a Trac colorized diff between the 1.0 branch from r2349 and the > current HEAD: > > https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/hwloc/changeset?old_path=/branches/v1.0&old=2349&new_path=/branches/v1.0&new=HEAD): > > The only interface change I see is this: > > -hwloc_linux_set_tid_cpubind(hwloc_topology_t topology > __hwloc_attribute_unused, pid_t tid, hwloc_const_cpuset_t hwloc_set) > +hwloc_linux_set_tid_cpubind(hwloc_topology_t topology > __hwloc_attribute_unused, pid_t tid __hwloc_attribute_unused, > hwloc_const_cpuset_t hwloc_set __hwloc_attribute_unused) > > Which I don't believe impacts shared library linking (i.e., if an app used > hwloc_linux_set_tid_cpubind() and compiled against hwloc 1.0.2, I believe it > would still link successfully against the 1.0.3 libhwloc. As such, I believe > that this is a non-event, in terms of shared library versioning. > > So according to the Libtool .so versioning instructions: > > http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Libtool-versioning.html#Libtool-versioning > > and > > http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Updating-version-info.html#Updating-version-info > > I believe the version number should be 0:2:0. > >
