Yep you are right... hadn't looked at the soname naming. I expected the
a soname Major, not Major.Minor.
Maybe that should be the real discussion then if this naming convention
is still appropriate?
Dennis
Helge Hess wrote:
On Oct 5, 2006, at 16:01, Dennis Leeuw wrote:
Currently the frequency in which we jump Major release numbers, and
thus breaking the ABI are not frequent.
Thats incorrect. For GNUstep the soname is Major.Minor, not Major.
Which is correct because the soname compatibility indeed broke for
every major.minor release in the past (classes or methods got added/
removed/behaviour changed).
---
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 Oct 4 11:58 libgnustep-base.so ->
libgnustep-base.so.1.13
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 25 Oct 4 11:58 libgnustep-base.so.1.13
-> libgnustep-base.so.1.13.0
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 7721941 Oct 4 11:58 libgnustep-base.so.1.13.0
---
You can't expect an application developed against 1.13.0 to run with
base 1.10 (despite having the same major version). I think its rather
trivial to proove that.
Again, you can easily check for (required!) soname increases in the
ChangeLog:
http://www.gnustep.org/resources/documentation/Developer/Base/
ReleaseNotes/ReleaseNotes.html
eg:
---snip---
Version 1.13.0
Several sets of classes have been added for dealing with urls and
predicates
Version 1.12.0
NSStream, NSIndexPath
New classes added to the library.
Version 1.10.1
NSXMLParser class added
Version 1.9.2:
NSError
New MacOSX compatibility class
---snap---
etc. just extracted one example. per version and just included 4 versions.
Base is a highly moving target for any developer. He can't know what he
will be able to use on a deployed system (eg is NSStream available or
not).
Am I missing a point here?
Yes, see above ;-)
Greets,
Helge
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
Gnustep-dev@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev