Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uknet!festival!edcogsci!richard From: richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) Subject: Re: shlib_minor from 0 to 1 Message-ID: <CtJoB6.Iqq@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh References: <3087d6$abn@quagga.ru.ac.za> <310fa1$c76@cleese.apana.org.au> <3112dm$gkr@quagga.ru.ac.za> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 1994 11:09:06 GMT Lines: 18 In article <3112dm$gkr@quagga.ru.ac.za> csgr@cs.ru.ac.za writes: >When I said that 1.1.5.1 binaries would not run on 1.1 was that a 1.1 >system with lib*.so.1.0 would not be able to run 1.1.5 binaries, which >would require lib*.so.1.1. Under SunOS, this would only result in a warning. Given that the major version is meant to change if the specification of the functions change, this seems like a reasonable solution. It's possible that something won't run because new functions have been added, but if it does run it should run as well as a binary compiled with the old library. Why not allow it? -- Richard -- Richard Tobin, HCRC, Edinburgh University R.Tobin@ed.ac.uk Ooooh! I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.