Your analysis of grpc/grpc-cpp and gtest seems reasonable to me. Thanks for having a look at these cases.
– Ben On Mon, Feb 20, 2023, at 4:28 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 2023-02-20 12:57, Ben Beasley wrote: >> This is one of the C libraries, which have a more conventional integer ABI >> version. For the C++ libraries, have a look at the grpc-cpp subpackage. You >> will find libraries like: >> >> libgrpc++.so.1.48()(64bit) > > > I see. That also looks like it's compatible with the proposed change. > > $ dnf -C repoquery --provides grpc-cpp | fgrep .so. > libgrpc++.so.1.48 > libgrpc++.so.1.48()(64bit) > ... > > ...where the full path is /usr/lib64/libgrpc++.so.1.48.3. If the ELF > dependency generator truncated the version, it should produce > "Requires: > libgrpc++.so.1.48()(64bit) >= 1.48", which wouldn't really improve > anything for this package, but for this type of package, where all > interfaces changes are already visibly breaking changes, maybe there's > nothing to be improved. > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
