Hi Gerald,
On 5/3/2009 9:51 AM, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Sunday 2009-05-03 17:41, Gerald I. Evenden wrote:
libproject_la_LDFLAGS = -version-info 2:0:1
which worked fine when with previous loading of a library with 2:0:0
versioning code.
But now, when I go through the autoreconf, configure, compile and install I
get:
libproject.so.1.1.0
Which is absolutely correct. Either you wanted 2:1:0, or 3:0:1 (just
a guess though, I can't read minds).
Have a look at `info libtool`, section Versioning::.
Hmmm. Jan is correct in his analysis of your versioning strategy.
current : revision : age
You really have no reason to increment only the age value of a library
version. What you're implying by this new version of 2.0.1 is that this
particular instance of your library is identical in every way to the
previous version of 2.0.0, except that this one is now backward
compatible with a prior version (1.x.y).
If you made changes to the library, but did not in any way modify the
interface, then you probably want to use version 2.1.0. If you modified
the interface in a manner that's 100% backward compatible with the
previous version, then you probably want 3.0.1. If you modified the
interface in a manner that is NOT backward compatible (i.e., you removed
an API function), then you probably want 3.0.0.
It appears that Libtool is smart enough to detect ridiculous cases, but
it should probably throw an error of some sort, rather than simply
generate code with a different version number.
Adding the libtool list.
Regards,
John
