[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: libtool versioning

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: 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

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


They are in the crowd with the answer before the question.
> Why do you dislike Jeopardy?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]