Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 08:38:27 -0400 From: Brian Cully <shmit@kublai.com> To: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ELF transition for ports Message-ID: <19980916083827.A223@kublai.com> In-Reply-To: <199809160627.XAA03085@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; from Satoshi Asami on Tue, Sep 15, 1998 at 11:27:39PM -0700 References: <Pine.OSF.3.90.980916115700.5131A-100000-100000-100000@mercury> <199809160627.XAA03085@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 15, 1998 at 11:27:39PM -0700, Satoshi Asami wrote: > Yes. Say libfoo.so.1 is a link to libfoo.so.1.26. If libfoo.so.1.27 > is really an upwards compatible (but not downwards compatible) upgrade > of libfoo.so.1.26, then the version number *should* be bumped. And > since ELF only sees "libfoo.so.1", the only way to bump it is > "libfoo.so.2". Let's make things nice and sparkling clear: So we should only bump the major number if it's required (i.e., we'll be fixing brain damage on the part of the library, which should have bumped its major number anyway when an incompatible change was made)? So in most cases a minor number bump will not warrant a major number bump (since minor number bumps normall don't create incompatible changes), no? -- Brian Cully <shmit@rcn.com> ``And when one of our comrades was taken prisoner, blindfolded, hung upside-down, shot, and burned, we thought to ourselves, `These are the best experiences of our lives''' -Pathology (Joe Frank, Somewhere Out There) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980916083827.A223>