Hi Christian, > >The libtool stuff is nice, but actually there is no big advantage of it. > > > Anyway, is there any reason not to follow libtool guidelines?
we can follow them, but I think we actually never did. The releases of OpenOBEX packages are so rare that never really noticed and we didn't break that much. > >My only big rule is to increment the soname if > >you really break the API. If it is fully backward compatible I don't see > >the need to do anything. And extensions are fully backware compatible. > > Actually it's about forward compatibility. Say you build/package an app > on a system having a lib with rev=1. Then you distribute it to some > system where it's the same lib, just rev is 0. Thats perfectly fine from > libtools point of view. And no package system or linker will complain. > The app won't run because it's been build for the wrong interface, see? No I don't see that, because I am quite sure that I have done this before. Does the dynamic loader really care. > While not an issue while building or developing it is a big issue for > packaging and deployment. Sometimes it is a good idea to recompile the dependencies. And forcing them to do is not a bad thing. Regards Marcel ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Openobex-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openobex-users
