Hi Steve, If the upstream osmocom soversion is bumped, then all forks will eventually need to follow too. Because software packages will begin getting written for version 2, then those forks will need to update to be useful to those programs.
I believe the soversion should only be bumped when there have been breaking non-backwards compatible API changes made. Nothing of that sort has happened with the recent pushes. So IMO I think reverting the soversion to 0 is the best solution, and that should be pushed ASAP before the problem becomes more widespread. I just talked to the dev of SDR++ and he agrees with this solution too. The distro's that already picked it up probably should be notified that the soversion was bumped by mistake and that it's been reverted. Regards, Carl Laufer On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 9:15 AM Steve Markgraf <st...@steve-m.de> wrote: > Hi, > > the reason why the version was bumped is because there are several > forks of rtl-sdr that used version 0.8 and beyond, without changing the > library name. Many people requested the release of a new version, and to > avoid colissions of the version number with those forks, the major > version was bumped to 2 as a 'leap forward'. > > On 22.03.24 05:05, Carl Laufer wrote: > > To add to this here is a Twitter/X thread that the developer of SDR++ > > has put out, regarding the issues he's seeing with this major version > > number change. > > > > https://twitter.com/ryzerth/status/1771016439681466697 > > <https://twitter.com/ryzerth/status/1771016439681466697> > > > Interestingly the last reply in that thread is from someone who > maintains one of those forks of rtl-sdr, and the first thing he did was > change the version to 2.1 - so yeah, in the end it was useless. > > We could probably revert the SOVERSION to 0, however, for those > distributions that already picked up the change this would be pretty > weird. > > Regards, > Steve > >
