Boost logo

Boost :

From: Neal Becker (ndbecker2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-15 10:05:21


Stefan Seefeld wrote:

> Neal Becker wrote:
>
>> I think the convention on Redhat, and probably others, is to use
>> -release.
>> Just like I did with boost-1.33.0-9.srpm. That is, vendor updates don't
>> use '.', they use '-'.
>
> Right. But how are the changes reflected in the DSO names ? Wasn't that
> the origin of this whole thread ? There needs to be a way for packagers
> to express 'minor release with no ABI changes', but if the full range
> of three position numers ('1.33.1') is already taken by boost.org itself,
> even without *any* semantics attached, that's hard to do without confusing
> users.
>

_If_ we could implement some process for verifying/tracking ABI
compatibility, then I think it would be sensible to set soname to e.g.,
libboost_python.so.1.33. The first actual library conforming to that ABI
is libboost_python.so.1.33.0. A compatible update is
libboost_python.so.1.33.1, which uses the same soname to indicate
compatibility.


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk