transition: proposal libpt2.6.5->libpt2.6.6 & libopal3.6.6->libopal3.6.7

[Mark Purcell]

On Saturday 24 April 2010 13:26:20 Craig Southeren wrote:
> As one of the maintainers of the upstream (opal & ptlib), please feel  
> free to email me if I can help

Craig,

Thanks for the offer.

I do have one question/ request of upstream.

Does the soname for ptlib/ opal need to change with every release?

Generally this isn't considered best practise:
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Program-Library-HOWTO/shared-libraries.html#AEN135
http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html#sonameapiabi
http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Updating-version-info.html

Are subsequent minor versions of the libs really not binary (ABI) compatible?

The problem for distributions is that every time the soname changes all depends of 
that library then need to be rebuilt and everyone needs to download all of the 
rebuilt binary packages.

In contrast if the soname is only bumped when binary compatibility is broken then 
we only need to rebuild as necessary.  

In this particular case I wouldn't need to coordinate the transition from ptlib 
2.6.5 -> 2.6.6 as I suspect they are binary compatible.

Mark
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-voip-maintainers/attachments/20100424/ae19d6dd/attachment-0001.pgp>