Hi,

On 05/04/2010 09:43 AM, Stefan Kisdaroczi wrote:
>> Reading your patch, maybe libxenomai.so.0 should be called libxenomai.so.1 ?
> 
> The comment in the libxenomai1.lintian hunk was added by Roland, so it's 
> probably
> better to ask him. Roland, what do you think ?

The comment resulted from the discrepancy between the Debian package
name "libxenomai1" and the SO version of libxenomai.so.0.

When there was no libxenomai.so, yet, I called the Debian package with
all the *.so.* "libxenomai1" by convention. I won't rename it to
"libxenomai0" because:

(1) I won't downgrade the "version" encoded in the package name
(2) There are other SOs in the package which have their own SO versions,
even though all or most of them also have "0".

I propose keeping number as they are for now. Everything is working fine
currently.

I just propose to stick to correct library SO versioning. See also

http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html

which is the Debian perspective on the issue but it gives a good
practical introduction to the topic. When SO versions change in the
correct way (e.g. major SO version increments on ABI changes), I will
update the package version as well.

bye,
  Roland

_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core

Reply via email to