Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 16 Sep 1998 03:24:30 -0500
From:      Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@Dataplex.NET>
To:        asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi Asami)
Cc:        kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: ELF transition for ports
Message-ID:  <l03130300b22523f73c79@[208.2.87.5]>
In-Reply-To: <199809160627.XAA03085@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
References:   <Pine.OSF.3.90.980916115700.5131A-100000-100000-100000@mercury> (message from Kris Kennaway on Wed, 16 Sep 1998 13:50:34 %2B0930 (CST))

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 1:27 AM -0500 9/16/98, Satoshi Asami wrote:
[Re - Major/Minor Numbering of Shared Libraries]
>The minor number is useless, since it is ignored by ELF.
>
> * It worries me that if there is a rapidly-changing port somewhere which
> * likes to bump its' minor version number, that before long we'll find
> * ourselves using libfoo.so.28 for libfoo.so.1.27. Is there something I've
> * missed about why the above cannot work?

Perhaps it would help to think of it from a different perspective.

ELF effectively has no MAJOR number. If the major number needs to change, it is
a new (different) library.

In the ELF world, think of libfoo.1.so.27.

I think that most of the readers recognize the reasoning behind the
incrementation
of the minor number.


Richard Wackerbarth



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?l03130300b22523f73c79>