Re: Version 1.15.0 compatible with libunbound.so.2, is it good idea?

[Paul Wouters via Unbound-users]

> 
> On May 9, 2022, at 05:33, Petr Menšík via Unbound-users 
> <unbound-users@lists.nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:
> 
> On 5/8/22 12:28, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> Yes, that should work.
>> 
>> The only prob is what we do now :)
>> Especially once some new features are available in libunbound and new
>> software
>> will try to use UNBOUND_VERSION_* macros to find out if it is
>> available :)
> 
> When someone needs new features of libunbound, he has two choices
> 
> a) Detect RHEL8 compatibility macros and use UNBOUD_VERSION_MINOR_REAL

Please ensure a simple define is present, preferably with REDHAT in the name ?

> b) Modify macros detection to detect the feature presence itself, not by
> unbound version

Please don’t assume autoconf. Without autoconf, detecting outside of ifdef’s is 
really hard and hacky.

Paul

>> 
>> IIt would not be a problem on Fedora. We can rebuild dependencies too.
> But RHEL is stable distribution not only for its own packages. We
> provide API and ABI even for any customer's projects. If they would use
> unbound for anything, they would have to rebuild in minor release and
> support one version before and one version after. That is what I would
> like to prevent.

Package old as libunboundXX, similar to like bind8/bind(9) in the past?

Paul