Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 15:09:48 +0100 From: Simon Barner <barner@gmx.de> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Shared library versioning policy Message-ID: <20050107140948.GB1325@zi025.glhnet.mhn.de>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--tjCHc7DPkfUGtrlw
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi,
I recently asked the boost-devel list to review my port of the boost
library, and on the whole everything seems to be okay.
There is one issue, though: Starting with Boost 1.31.0, I forced shared
library version numbers: so.1 for Boost 1.31.0, so.2 for the current
1.32.0 release.
I now learnt that starting with version 1.32.0, Boost has its own shared
library version policy: so.1.32.0
This raises the following questions:
- Is this naming scheme compatible to [1]?
- Shall I change the port to use Boost's versioning scheme?
o This would have the advantage to provide a port that is more
compatible to the official boost distribution.
o The drawback is that the port with so.2 libraries is already in our
CVS repository, which would mean that the shared library version
numbers would decrease.
Thanks for your advise,
Simon
[1] http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/developers-handbook/policies-shlib.html
--tjCHc7DPkfUGtrlw
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFB3pgsCkn+/eutqCoRApNMAKDIr8m4hVVClL1FcPk7HxptVxG+KwCgzc3Q
rp3M0PmJTn4iIM8rog8Z7GI=
=p+uT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--tjCHc7DPkfUGtrlw--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050107140948.GB1325>