version and release number

thanks in advance 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 htt

Re: version and release number

Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Lorenzo Bettini wrote: Never try to set the interface numbers so that they correspond to the release number of your package. This is an abuse that only fosters misunderstanding of the purpose of library versions. Instead, use the -release flag (see

Re: version and release number

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

printing library version

Hi if I want to print the library version from a program I cannot simply current:revision:age because that does not correspond to the actual lib file name, e.g., 2:0:1 corresponds to mylib.so.1.1.0... is it correct to print 2:0:1 or 1.1.0? thanks in advance Lorenzo -- Lorenzo

Re: printing library version

Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hi Lorenzo, * Lorenzo Bettini wrote on Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:58:04PM CEST: if I want to print the library version from a program I cannot simply current:revision:age because that does not correspond to the actual lib file name, e.g., 2:0:1 corresponds to mylib.so

Re: printing library version

Jason Curl wrote: But I agree with Tor here, the "Library Version" doesn't necessarily have to be the "Library API version" which is how I understand libtool. yes, actually I mean library API version... -- Lorenzo Bettini, PhD in Computer Science, DI, Univ. Tor

building a completely static executable (using boost regex library)

tex_unlock' what am I doing wrong? thanks in advance 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.co

Re: building a completely static executable (using boost regex library)

Peter Johansson wrote: Hi Lorenzo, Lorenzo Bettini wrote: Hi I was trying to build, in linux, a completely static executable that uses libboost_regex; I issued configure LDFLAGS="-static" make LDFLAGS="-all-static" [...] what am I doing wrong? Are you sure you ha

Re: building a completely static executable (using boost regex library)

Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Tue, 14 Jul 2009, Lorenzo Bettini wrote: I was trying to build, in linux, a completely static executable that uses libboost_regex; I issued configure LDFLAGS="-static" make LDFLAGS="-all-static" but when it comes to linking I get this error:

versioning and soname

1.4._ right? If I now remove an interface I should set as a library version the following one, right? 6:0:0 and this will generate a soname 6.0.0 i.e., from soname 1.4 we go directly to 6.0 is this the intended behavior? thanks in advance Lorenzo -- Lorenzo Bettini, PhD in Computer Sc

Re: versioning and soname

Thanks for all your clarifying emails :-) cheers Lore -- 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