On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:46:35 +0200 Thomas wrote:
TA> in all of our 5.x releases we set the SONAME of our libraries to:
TA>
TA> foo# objdump -x /path/to/net-snmp/lib/lib*.so | grep SONAME
TA> SONAME libnetsnmp.so.5
TA>
TA> i.e. only put the *major* version (5) in. Are we really intending to
TA> claim that the ABI won't change at all between minor (5.x) releases?
We've a similair discussion before, about the libtool recommended versioning
vs ours.
TA> Otherwise, shall we rather use an SONAME like "libnetsnmp.so.5.<minor>"
TA> (e.g. libnetsnmp.so.5.2) and thus require applications to relink when
TA> upgrading from 5.x to 5.y?
I think that sounds like a good idea, as 5.x vs 5.n is usually a significant
release. And applications wouldn't *have* to re-link. They should continue to
work with the previous library, and only need to re-link if they want to take
advantage of the new features.
TA> Comments appreciated. Also see bug #1256697 for a related bug report
TA> (although I'm not yet convinced it applies).
I'd be willing to bet it applies. I'm guessing that if one did a diff between
all the header files, there have been some structure size changes.
--
NOTE: messages sent directly to me, instead of the lists, will be deleted
unless they are requests for paid consulting services.
Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie
Support: <http://www.net-snmp.org/> <irc://irc.freenode.net/#net-snmp>
Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=net-snmp-coders>
You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
