Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] GNU Radio shared library versioning

[Philip Balister]

On 06/27/2013 10:18 AM, Sylvain Munaut wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> [libboost_date_time-mt.so.1.48.0]
> 
> Not necessarely so, see on my system :
> 
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root    36 Dec 16  2012
> /usr/lib/libboost_date_time-mt-1_49.so ->
> libboost_date_time-mt-1_49.so.1.49.0
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 72168 Dec 16  2012
> /usr/lib/libboost_date_time-mt-1_49.so.1.49.0
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root    29 Dec 16  2012
> /usr/lib/libboost_date_time-mt.so -> libboost_date_time-mt-1_49.so
> 
>> Comparing the strings extracted from the .so with readelf, we can see
>> the gnuradio libraries are not properly versioned (I show the boost one
>> for comparison).
>>
>> I expect to see:
>>
>> libgnuradio-filter.so.3.7.0
> 
> You should read
> http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Updating-version-info.html
> 
> The 3 numbers there are the 3 numbers after the .so.xxx
> 
> Imagine you have libXXX.so.1.2.3   and the libXXX.so  & libXXX.so.1
> symbolic link which is the common style.
> 
> In general the libXXX.so should point to whatever you want to link to
> when compiling a new software and using -lXXX
> The binary will then contain the info that it will try to load
> libXXX.so.1  and that implies that all libXX.so.1.N.N have the same
> ABI.
> The .2.3 part should only be used for internal revisions that don't
> change any thing externally so that a software compiled against an
> older lib will be able to load the new one without any issue.
> 
> This would clearly not be the case for libgnuradio.3 ...

So you are suggesting 3.7 should really be 4.0.0 for shared lib
versioning sanity?

Philip

> 
> Cheers,
> 
>     Sylvain
> 
>