[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Any opposition to changing share/guile/X.Y.Z to share/guile/X.Y?

From: Andreas Rottmann
Subject: Re: Any opposition to changing share/guile/X.Y.Z to share/guile/X.Y?
Date: 12 Nov 2002 22:10:08 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2

Mikael Djurfeldt <address@hidden> writes:

> Rob Browning <address@hidden> writes:
> > I'm working on the packaging of 1.6 for Debian, and I wondered if
> > anyone would oppose dropping the minor revision number from guile's
> > working directory.  The argument against would be that it isn't as
> > specific and would prevent you from having two minor revisions of
> > guile installed in the same place at the same time, but you can't do
> > that anyway since their library, binary, etc. names would collide.
> Hmm... shouldn't the libraries from different minor versions of Guile
> have different version numbers (bumbed between versions) and therefore
> be possible to install in parallel?
No, shared library SONAME should only change when a
binary-incompatible change happens, which shouldn't be the case with
stable guile versions, or am i wrong here?

> Regarding the binary: How about using similar conventions as for
> emacs: guile symlinked to guile1.6.1
Hmm, I wonder if people really want different minor versions of
the same major version of guile installed.

Regards, Andy
Andreas Rottmann         | address@hidden        | address@hidden | 
address@hidden | GnuPG Key:
Fingerprint              | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219  F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]