Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: adminutil - Utility library for Fedora Directory Server administration Alias: adminutil https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235293 ------- Additional Comments From rmeggins@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-05-17 10:05 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > i think that what im refering to is > > `-version-number MAJOR[:MINOR[:REVISION]]' ... > numbers are already used across operating systems. New projects > should use the `-version-info' flag instead. > > the .so should be .so.1.1.0 not .so.0.0.0 The description says "New projects should use the -version-info flag instead." I see a real mix of usage in /usr/lib - some libs use -version-number, some use -version-info, some are just .so with no version (or version in the name e.g. libnspr4.so). Is there a page on the fedoraproject wiki that describes library naming and versioning conventions? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review