On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 10:32:22AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Jan 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 09:27:00PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > Another way is to bump the soname on libL at the time you bump the one
> > > on libM. People are
On Fri, 04 Jan 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 09:27:00PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Another way is to bump the soname on libL at the time you bump the one
> > on libM. People are usually against this, since in fact the libL
> > interface hasn't changed at all. I'
On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 09:27:00PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> "Steve M. Robbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If we go this route, how do we gracefully handle a bump in
> > SONAME for libM?
> We have no way. We have an ungraceful way, however: create a flag
> day, when all the relev
"Steve M. Robbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If we go this route, how do we gracefully handle a bump in
> SONAME for libM?
We have no way. We have an ungraceful way, however: create a flag
day, when all the relevant applications need to be recompiled.
Another way is to bump the soname on
4 matches
Mail list logo