[LAU] [FFADO-devel] [ANN] FFADO 2.0 Release Candidate 1 (1.999.40) available

[Jack O'Quin]

On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Jack O'Quin <jack.oquin at gmail.com> wrote:

> The traditional way is to use libtool version numbers.  The idea is to
> give the library a three-part number reflecting: (a) the current
> interface version; (b) minor compatible updates to that version; and
> (c) an indication of how many previous versions are also supported.
> It's basically a binary compatibility scheme.  The loader can compare
> the library version with that used by a program linking to it.  If the
> versions are compatible, then that library should work.  The idea is
> simple, but the details are quite messy and confusing...
>
>  http://www.nondot.org/sabre/Mirrored/libtool-2.1a/libtool_6.html
>  http://www.ensta.fr/~diam/dev/online/autoconf/autobook/autobook_91.html
>
> There is native support for all that in the automake, autoconf
> toolset, which leaves the question of how to do similar stuff in
> SCons.  I am just beginning to use SCons on another project, and
> coincidentally I wanted to do libtool versioning for it only last
> week.  I was unable to come up with a quick solution.  The native
> SCons SharedLibrary() method does not obviously support it.  I didn't
> spend much time researching the matter, however.
>
> SCons is a good tool, and is becoming popular.  Surely many people
> have already solved this problem by now.

A little further searching leads me to question that statement.  It
seems that SCons prefers not to use libtool, because it does not work
with Windows tools.

  http://osdir.com/ml/programming.tools.scons.user/2003-10/msg00107.html

The suggestion about appending version numbers to the .so file name is
probably worth considering.  I'll give it some more thought.

I do think version numbers are going to be important for libffado,
given the need to coexist in the field with different versions of JACK
and other users of the library.
-- 
 joq