> > If you put the name into the filename, you would have to omit any > > public indication that the library is for 3.0.1 and not for 3.0. > > That seems like a bad idea, so I don't think the trade-off here is > > neutral. > > Why is this a bad idea? The only drawback is that you can't have > two libraries that only differ in the last field side by side.
As a personal matter, I just think it's not sound project management to hide changes. But as a practical matter, it's a problem for packaging systems if they can't depend on "owning" the files they think they own. There are also security systems that rely on checksumming files and slamming in a changed file with the same name is a good way to trigger a false alarm (and who's to say it's false?) The reason AIX might be a problem is that its loader works more like Windows' does, and as I said, that's one platform where you kind of get stuck hiding changes like this, which is why the .NET assembly feature came about. It just doesn't matter much there because the packaging is a disaster to begin with. AIX is in between, but I would argue it's better to special-case it then use that approach everywhere else. I also wouldn't assume it isn't workable for AIX by now unless somebody demonstrates that. When I last tried to use it, I couldn't even get OpenSSL built there, so I just didn't see libtool issues as my biggest concern. -- Scott --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
