From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Feb 13 9:17:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBBE037B491 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:17:29 -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 f1DHHNW39519; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:17:23 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Message-Id: <200102131717.f1DHHNW39519@harmony.village.org> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Subject: Re: Proposal on shared libs version values. Cc: "Alexander N. Kabaev" , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: Your message of "13 Feb 2001 18:04:21 +0100." References: <200102131658.f1DGw2E12845@billy-club.village.org> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:17:23 -0700 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes: : Hmm? I must have seriously misunderstood all the discussions that went : on around E-day. What I had thought happened was that ld just uses the symbolic link blindly. However, I just tried it on my system: cd /usr/lib cp libc.so.4 libc.so.4.1 ln -sf libc.so.4.1 libc.so ldconfig -R ldconfig -r | grep libc.so.4 33:-lc.4 => /usr/lib/libc.so.4 So it does look like it has to be a single number. Forget what I said about 5.1 being a viable option. My OpenBSD box does have minor numbers appended, but they also have hacks in their ld to cope. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message