On Fri, 31. Aug 13:31, Marcin Wojdyr wrote:
CCP4 libraries don't increase soversion as recommended in the cited sources, because it would be additional thing to do and there are many things with higher priority. IIUC the primary benefit is that a few versions of the same library can be packaged and installed at the same time. When it's needed we'll bump soversion. Note that not all projects use so-version as autotools docs recommend. For example in Qt so-version == version. There are many libraries with 0.0.0 in my /usr/lib, which is just a default value in libtool, and many projects don't increase so-version on every ABI change, because if part of the ABI is experimental and changes often the version would go up very quickly. But if you come across any practical problems (with ccp4 libs) we'll try to help. There is also this option in libtool[1]. This is pretty much what you describe with QT. I don't know about the Debian Policy here. Maybe Fred could lighten me up. This option can also be used with my proposed cctbx patch.
I don't care if upstream is using 0.0.0 all the time. But it might happen that somebody will complain if the API/ABI compatibility breaks. Most important part of this number is "current". If ccp4 never changes the interface so 0 is fine then we shouldn't have any issues here. But in the rare case that the interface will be changed (with no backward compatibility) I'd be thankful if upstream increments this. [1] http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Release-numbers.html#Re... regards Radi