Am 03.09.23 um 12:55 schrieb Jeremie Courreges-Anglas:
On Sun, Sep 03 2023, Jonathan Schleifer <[email protected]> wrote:
Am 31.08.23 um 09:56 schrieb Jonathan Schleifer:
Am 31.08.23 um 08:26 schrieb Stuart Henderson:
SHARED_LIBS += objfw 1.0
SHARED_LIBS += objfwrt 1.0
SHARED_LIBS += objfwtls 1.0
I can't remember how strict we are with these version starting numbers
but iirc we start with 0.1 (?) I don't really mind if this isn't
changed.
The bumpings are the more important ones anyway.
0.0.
The key thing is to make sure that changing the versions in SHARED_LIBS
changes the versions of the produced file, i.e. make sure that ports is
in control.
Ok, now I have questions :).
I was under the impression that the the SHARED_LIBS should match the
.so name? This would be the case with 1.0, as upstream used 0.0 during
development when there was no stable ABI/API (and users could have
installed such a pre-1.0 release manually on OpenBSD). I could find
https://man.openbsd.org/library-specs.7 which seems to indicate it
must match the .so name, as well as lining out rules on when and how
to update the version, which match upstream in this case (I can vouch
for this, as I am the upstream).
Given that, wouldn't it be better to have it 1.0 instead of always one
major version less than upstream?*
* Very, very early, there was a major version of as high as 8. But
this was a decade or so ago and I think nobody ever used it. And on
a version that was very much declared "this WILL break, don't use this
for anything"
I'm happy to change it to 0.0, of course, but would really like to fully
understand the implications of this. Should every port, when imported to
OpenBSD, change the soname to 0.0?
The library version should be 0.0 for a new port and the soname should
match the library name.
Ah, OK, so then I was confused by the documentation, which I interpreted
as it needs to match. Then I see absolutely no reason why it shouldn't
be set to 0.0 indeed.
That's how we handle it in ports, with all due
respect that's not something that you, as an upstream, should feel
concerned about IMO.
Sorry, I didn't mean to question the way you do things in OpenBSD ports,
I was merely trying to understand if that has any implications for soname.
The version used in ports may stay at 0.0 or move to 0.1 or 1.0, 2.0
etc, it depends on how you (upstream) preserve or change API and ABI in
the future, but it may also depend on changes in the OpenBSD base system
and ports tree. That's why the port for objfw should have complete
control about the version used.
All good then! Should I send another tarball with it set to 0.0, or is
this small enough for whoever imports it to just do it?
Thanks again!
--
Jonathan
