Should .pc filenames depend on the version number?
This may be an upstream type question, but because I do the *autotools type stuff for libswe, (even though I I don't touch the actual source,) I thought I would ask this question. should the .pc file name depend on the version number of the library? That is for version 1.80.00.x of libswe should the version number be in the name for the .pc file? Someone has suggested that if the version number was not in the name of the .pc file, people linking to the library would not have to change their link code. In my case the version number was originally put in by anjuta. Are their any counter arguments against removing the version number from the .pc filename? Thank you for considering this question. -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 --- Encryption works. Properly implemented strong crypto systems are one of the few things that you can rely on. Unfortunately, endpoint security is so terrifically weak that NSA can frequently find ways around it. Edward Snowden signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Should .pc filenames depend on the version number?
I am not sure which version numbers you are referring to but the API version number should be part of the .pc file name (for example GTK+ has gtk+-2.0.pc and gtk+-3.0.pc) but the ABI version number should not be. The version number of the library is usually not the same as either of the API/ABI version numbers (for example GTK+ is 2.24.21 and 3.8.4 in Debian). -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6es3qmejuincpb4a9qc4jntrgepr-q51m5u+-a3p6u...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Should .pc filenames depend on the version number?
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes: I am not sure which version numbers you are referring to but the API version number should be part of the .pc file name (for example GTK+ has gtk+-2.0.pc and gtk+-3.0.pc) but the ABI version number should not be. The version number of the library is usually not the same as either of the API/ABI version numbers (for example GTK+ is 2.24.21 and 3.8.4 in Debian). One way to think of it is that you should have a version number in the *.pc file in mostly the same circumstances where you would maintain multiple versioned -dev packages in the Debian archive, and for the same reasons. Normally, you'd want to avoid this, since it means a lot more work and security fixes to both versions of the API and usually isn't needed or warranted. But sometimes the API changes so much in libraries that are so widely used that we have to maintain two parallel APIs for a while. There are a few places where it may make sense to put a version number on the *.pc file without supporting multiple versions of the -dev package at the same time in Debian, generally where there's a radical API change that will break all current users but the library isn't widely used enough that it's worth maintaining two versions, but I think those are generally rarer. But the default should be to not include it, just like the default for -dev packages is to not include version numbers in the package name or support more than one -dev package for a given library at a time. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87zjqpluqh@windlord.stanford.edu
