Re: Do we need to bump the shared library version for 2.4.0?

[Joe Orton]

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 04:31:31PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> 3) Don't increment the shared library version at all.
> 
>    The justification would be that we haven't removed any symbols, all
>    symbols in libgnutls-extra are still available via libgnutls and work
>    the same way.  The only thing that would break here is if someone is
>    dlopen'ing libgnutls-extra.so and calls the openpgp related
>    functions.  Strictly speaking I'm not sure this is a valid approach,
>    since we HAVE removed symbols from libgnutls-extra.

Having looked into this, I can't see why that would break.  dlsym() will 
still find the symbols since libgnutls-extra.so is linked against 
libgnutls; the wording in POSIX is very specific that this must be the 
case.  Attached a test case which finds gnutls_malloc via dlopen of 
libgnutls-extra.so for PoC.

So I think it's very reasonable to argue that the ABI of libgnutls-extra 
has not changed in this case and no soname bump is necessary.

joe