> I suggest that, for shared libraries, the hash should disregard the
> library's current version, and consider only the interface version.
> That way, replacement of the shared library won't require any change
> in the installed executable.
I understand the motivation, but tha
Richard Stallman skribis:
> No. Basically, each package is installed in its own directory, pretty
> much à la GNU Stow. However, the directory name contains the hash of
> all the inputs used to build that package (source code, compiler,
> libraries, build scripts, etc.) Thus, w
How does that sound? :-)
You had me at it being written in Scheme ;-)
