[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: IRIX and .so numbers
From: |
Nick Blievers |
Subject: |
RE: IRIX and .so numbers |
Date: |
Fri, 11 Jan 2002 07:56:46 +1100 |
Hi,
I had a chat with some longtime SGI ppl, and noone could think of any
reason why "0" for the version number should cause a problem, so I think
this should be fine. Leaving a comment can't hurt tho! :) Also, maybe this
hasn't been noticed as most build systems are perhaps a little more flexible
than the openoffice one...?
Thanks
Nick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary V. Vaughan [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Friday, 11 January 2002 7:26
> To: Robert Boehne
> Cc: Nick Blievers; address@hidden
> Subject: Re: IRIX and .so numbers
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 05:52:01PM -0600, Robert Boehne wrote:
> > I've been poking around a little on IRIX, and I can't find anything that
> > wouldn't allow "0" for a version.
>
> Okay. If you are able to build and link against some substantial libtool
> library using project with the ``+1'' removed, feel free to
> commit that patch
> to HEAD and branch-1-4.
>
> I am still somewhat surprised that this code has generated no
> complaints in
> the intervening years until now... perhaps you should leave a
> comment near
> the change so that it is easy to undo if we discover an unforseen
> consequence
> further down the line?
>
> Cheers,
> Gary.
> --
> ())_. Gary V. Vaughan gary@(oranda.demon.co.uk|gnu.org)
> ( '/ Research Scientist http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk ,_())____
> / )= GNU Hacker http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool
> \' `&
> `(_~)_ Tech' Author http://sources.redhat.com/autobook =`---d__/
>