I'm afraid this discussion is losing the common interest. I.e. we could continue it by private mail or IRC (if I'm logged in ;-}.
2010/1/31 Gabriel M. Beddingfield <[email protected]>: > > > On Sun, 31 Jan 2010, Daniel Roßberg wrote: > >> unfortunately you seem to insist on the "DLL Hell" as the problem. >> Although my problem is connected with exe-dll-compatibility it is not >> a problem of a shared dll. Now, as mentioned in a previous posting, > > Sorry... I guess I don't understand what you're trying to do. Even when you > re-explain it, it sounds the same to me. So, I'll quite bothering you. :-) See e.g. http://www.iabg.de/verteidigung/brlcad/brlcad_en.php >> it is a feature of the brlcad.dll that it can be replaced with a more >> recent version. BTW, you haven't to go to the registry to see its >> version the dll's properties dialog will show it. >> >> However I see that Linux people have problems with this philosophy. I > > OK, this floors me. :-) > >> If a library has changed they recompile all >> programs depending on this library. All other programs have bad luck. > > No. I can compile a program against Qt 4.0.0. No matter how many times I > upgrade the Qt libraries (.so or .dll), my program will work just fine -- > without recompile -- with every Qt 4.x.x version of the .so or .dll. > > Qt is not unique. Most libraries work this way to some extent. Qt is a good example :-) There where a lot of behavior changes during the 4.x series. Therefore a work-around you made for version 4.2 may show an unintentional behavior with version 4.6. Now my question is: How can the application remember that the original Qt version was the 4.2? Maybe libtool or ld may lead me to an answer. >> dll version number with a stored one (see e.g. "Version Numbering" in >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_hell#Solutions for an idea on >> how to handle this) and maybe warn the user about a probable >> incompatible library. > > This "Version Numbering" is pretty much what I described that libtool is > doing with .so files on linux. I had a different impression: "Unfortunately, this convention [i.e. release numbers encoded in the library names] conflicts directly with libtool's idea of library interface versions, ..." (from the libtool manual) Then they write something about libtool's -release flag. However, from the manual I have an idea how it could work: The version information is part of the .la-file in liked this way into the executable (which uses this information e.g. for its library search method during loading). Right? Regards, Daniel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com _______________________________________________ BRL-CAD Developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel
