Dave Shield wrote:
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?
Ummm...
I'm not sure I fully understand the ramifications of such a decision,
but it probably sounds sensible.
The ramifications very much depend on your system setup details which is
why I would love to hear opinions from vendors/packagers, especially on
whether we should even change this for the deployed versions (5.[12].x).
This *will* affect their upgrade procedures. Anyone listening?
+Thomas
--
Thomas Anders (thomas.anders at blue-cable.de)
-------------------------------------------------------
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
