Please read the libtool info files. Library versions != Source versions.
Library versions are dependent on binary-compatibility, or should be,
and this is fully documented in the package 'libtool-doc' in the
section on Versioning. And then forward the information to
upstream so that they know, as well. Hopefully you can reach a
consensus from that.
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 11:40:28PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
> I have a library package at version 2.01, and the soversion in it is 0.0.0
> (seems upstream hadn't heard about library versioning). Now, I'm
> considering packaging a new upstream version (2.3.4, still in prerelease
> though), but they *still* haven't heard about library versioning, so
> compiling the new source still just yields 0.0.0. And the new version is
> binary-incompatible with the old release (some C++ classes changed).
>
> What course of action is recommended here? I guess that perhaps I could
> hack the upstream makefiles to add some library version, but then which
> version to use? Or just rename the library? Hmm... or simply drop the old
> version, since I seem to maintain all the packages that currently depend
> on it anyway?
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;; Matthew Danish email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;;
;; OpenPGP public key available from: 'finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]' ;;
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
