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]' ;; ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
