Jun Aruga wrote:
> Someone, could give us advice about below situation, if the new
> package htslib's "/usr/lib64/libhts.so.1.9" is valid?
> "1.9" is upstream software's version. "2" is ABI's version (so version).
This can happen with non-autotools, non-libtool projects. libtool enforces
some strict rules where the full version must be of the form
major.minor.revision and the major version just major. (Actually, libtool
doesn't even let you specify major and minor directly, but LT_CURRENT and
LT_AGE, and it computes major=LT_CURRENT-LT_AGE and minor=LT_AGE for you.)
Other build systems such as CMake allow you to set arbitrary strings as the
major version and the full version, and the major version need not
necessarily be a prefix of the full version. So they will let you get away
with 1.9 as the full version and 2 as the major version.
There is nothing wrong with arbitrary versions if the build system used by
upstream allows them. The Fedora packages should NOT change the upstream
versioning scheme because it would make the packages incompatible with
upstream.
So, to sum it up, yes, /usr/lib64/libhts.so.1.9 and /usr/lib64/libhts.so.2
is a valid combination. Unusual, but valid.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
