On 21/06/2016 14:33, Miller, Mark C. wrote:
My understanding is that releases of HDF5 which differ in only the last (patch) digit are not *always* ABI (Application Binary Interface) compatible. They try to be but for practical reasons they are not always.
When they are not compatible, they should bump the ABI. HDF5 it is already a champion as bumper in that field, I am not aware of another library that bumped so many time between minor version.
When the are not, compiling (e.g. using headers) with one version of the library but linking (e.g. using .a,.so,.dyllib) to another can fail for all sorts of hard-to-diagnose reasons.
The normal case on distribution is different: I built the octave and netcdf package with hdf5-1.8.16; later I package the hdf5-1.8.17 that is supposed to be ABI compatible, and it produces a shared lib with the same name of hdf5-1.8.16 release. Why I should rebuild octave and netcdf ? It does not make sense. Regards Marco _______________________________________________ Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion. [email protected] http://lists.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_lists.hdfgroup.org Twitter: https://twitter.com/hdf5
