Re: Version api [was 276-gary-remove-unusable-deprecated-ltdl-apis.diff]

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hi Gary,

Hallo Ralf!

> Maybe we should add a couple of public #define's for ltdl API?
> Like this:
>   #define LTDL_MAJOR  2
>   #define LTDL_MINOR  0
>   #define LTDL_REVISION  0
>   #define LTDL_RELEASE ((LTDL_MAJOR << 16) | (LTDL_MINOR << 8) | LTDL_REVISION)
>
> so packages that have to maintain source-compatibility with both pre-
> and post-2.0 can do so without a configure check?  (I haven't thought
> much about this, the numbering should probably be done according to
> VERSION_INFO).
>
> Thoughts?

No, I don't like this.  We already maintain version-info, so perhaps we could
find a way to push the range of supported interface numbers to the user at
runtime.  There is already ltversion.m4 which might be enough, or perhaps we
could stand to enhance it and hang a configure time ltdl interface check
macro?

This all sounds like post 2.0 to me...

Cheers,
        Gary.
--
Gary V. Vaughan      ())_.  address@hidden,gnu.org}
Research Scientist   ( '/   http://tkd.kicks-ass.net
GNU Hacker           / )=   http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool
Technical Author   `(_~)_   http://sources.redhat.com/autobook

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature