|
From: | Peter Rosin |
Subject: | Re: libtool versioning |
Date: | Thu, 06 May 2010 21:30:40 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 |
Den 2010-05-06 19:45 skrev Jason Curl:
On 04/05/2010 20:41, Peter Rosin wrote:Den 2010-05-04 20:00 skrev Ralf Wildenhues:Ah, ok. Yes, you're right. Feel free to commit a patch to s/removed/& or changed/ in 6.Sorry I came in late for the discussion. Is it correct to interpret "removed" as an interface has been removed, or an interface has been changed so as to cause a binary incompatibility, so that bumping the major version is the result to indicate it is not 100% binary compatible with the previous version, and therefore may break a program that is already compiled against this library?
Hi Jason, 's/removed/& or changed/' could have been spelled out in full as 's/removed/removed or changed/' if that clarifies the situation for you? So, both removing an interface and changing an interface cause a binary incompatibility, so both actions need a major version bump and age=0 (i.e. not compatible with previous versions). Cheers, Peter -- They are in the crowd with the answer before the question. > Why do you dislike Jeopardy?
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |