Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Lorenzo Bettini wrote:
so would you suggest to use only version info and no release info, am
I right? I was only concerned about the fact that the release number
of the library is not visible anywhere and that it would force the use
to specify a name together with the number...
There are a few reasons for using release info. Some projects don't
care about binary compatibility or updates to libraries so they could
use release info to differentiate between releases. Other projects
maintain parallel branches of the software (e.g. older and newer) and
want an easy way to allow the multiple branches to be distributed
without fear that they will collide with other branch's version info and
end up producing shared libraries with the same names.
OK, so probably if a library changes radically from one (major) release
number to another (e.g., qt3 and qt4), it makes sense to append the
major release number to the name of the library, so that the user of the
library has to make explicit the library release he intends to use, right?
thanks
Lorenzo
--
Lorenzo Bettini, PhD in Computer Science, DI, Univ. Torino
ICQ# lbetto, 16080134 (GNU/Linux User # 158233)
HOME: http://www.lorenzobettini.it MUSIC: http://www.purplesucker.com
http://www.myspace.com/supertrouperabba
BLOGS: http://tronprog.blogspot.com http://longlivemusic.blogspot.com
http://www.gnu.org/software/src-highlite
http://www.gnu.org/software/gengetopt
http://www.gnu.org/software/gengen http://doublecpp.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
