From owner-freebsd-current Mon Feb 12 17:36:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50DE637B491 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:36:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1D1a9W33904; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:36:10 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Message-Id: <200102130136.f1D1a9W33904@harmony.village.org> To: Peter Wemm Subject: Re: Patch for FILE problems (was Re: -CURRENT is bad for me...) Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:32:15 PST." <200102130132.f1D1WFU56412@mobile.wemm.org> References: <200102130132.f1D1WFU56412@mobile.wemm.org> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:36:09 -0700 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <200102130132.f1D1WFU56412@mobile.wemm.org> Peter Wemm writes: : Warner Losh wrote: : significance to the naming at all. The versioning is done at link time : by the libfoo.so -> libfoo.so.N symlink. Ah. That's different. If it is that easy, then my objection is withdrawn. I wasted about 3 days trying to untangle a version downgrade, but now that I think about that was in the 2.x days when we had a.out libs. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message