Subject: xforms shlib version numbers [was: Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc]
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christoph Badura <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/26/1999 00:24:49
email@example.com (Bill Studenmund) writes:
>I think we should probably disable the shared library for this package in
>general. My concern is that xforms numbers releases more like a program
>than how we number a library.
>For instance, the 0.86 xforms is NOT compatable with the 0.88 version. You
>have to re-compile source - the API changed enough.
>Given that, I think we're safer making it just a static library for now.
I don't see what's unsave about it now. As long as you don't use wildcard
depends (and I don't see a good reason to want to use them for xforms)
TRT will happen.
But if you must change the version number, why not use 86 and 88 as the
major number so that it is more obvious what version you are dealing with.
Not that you'd be able to install both version in parallel with just that
change, so you wouldn't solve a problem with that...
BTW, is it nowadays out of fashion to use Subject: lines that have some
relation to the subject?
Christoph Badura www.netbsd.org
Anything that can be done in O(N) can be done in O(N^2).
-- Ralf Schuettau (after looking at a particular piece of code)