Re: [Libcdio-devel] libcdio-0.91 - libiso9660 version

[Rocky Bernstein]

You are correct. I'll put out libcdio 0.92 sometime today.


On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 7:36 AM, Chris Clayton <address@hidden>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've noticed that the version of libiso9660 produced by building
> libcdio-0.91 is less than the version produced by
> building libcdio-0.83. Whilst I can't claim to fully understand the
> libtool versioning scheme, this does seem odd.
> Installing the rpm I have built fails because other applications depend on
> libiso9660.so.8.  Consequently, I looked at
> the related guidance notes in lib/iso9660/Makefile.am (and the libtool
> info page) and am a bit puzzled about the values
> I see in the libiso9660_la_{CURRENT,REVISION,AGE} variables.
>
> In v0.83 the values are CURRENT = 8, REVISION = 0 and AGE= 0. In v0.91
> CURRENT and REVISION are unchanged, but AGE has
> been incremented to 1. According to the notes, the only reason to
> increment AGE is that interfaces have been added since
> the last public release - i.e. the condition in note 5 is true. If note 5
> is true, then note 4 must also have been true,
> which means that CURRENT should now have the value 9.
>
> Of course, I'm assuming here that one works through notes 3 to 6 in order,
> amending the variables according to the truth
> of the condition. That may be an incorrect assumption, but, having read
> the notes in the info page, I can't see how the
> dynamic linker could work if any other method of arriving at the version
> numbering was used.
>
> I'm not subscribed, so please cc me on any reply.
>
> Thanks
>
> Chris
>
>