Jason, > On a related but lately ignored note, for a packager for any Linux > distro, what is the solution for the non conventional naming (versioning > really) of the library? > > It is: libsword-1.5.11.so when it should be something like > libsword-1.5.11.so.1 or libsword-1.5.so.11 and then use a symlink for > the non versioned name like libsword.1.5.11.so or libsword.1.5.so > respectively.
Unfortunately, the naming schemes you suggest would be deceptive and counter-productive. There is no guarantee that libsword-1.5.11.so will be interface-compatible with libsword-1.5.12.so. So naming them libsword-1.5.so.11 and libsword-1.5.so.12 would simply lead to confusion. Calling them libsword.so.1.5.11 would be even more misleading. Those are just my opinion - I see nothing wrong with calling it libsword-1.5.11.so. In fact, I think it's much better than libraries which seem to have no way of indicating to someone observing them what their actual version might be. With just a simple glance at the libsword name, I can tell what version I'm linking against. --Greg > > Also note that libsword.so.1.5.11 would be excellent as well. > > http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Program-Library-HOWTO/shared-libraries.html#AEN46 > > Thanks, > Jason > > > > _______________________________________________ > sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel > Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page > _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
