Re: libiberty packaging troubles

[John Levon <levon at movementarian dot org>]

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 01:51:54AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> It doesn't have a defined interface.  The only time it's present on the
> system as a shared library is to save space, and I'm not 100% sure why
> we ever install the static library.

or the (broken) headers !

As for the "no defined interface", well, my code is currently working
across a wide range of bfd/libiberty versions. It's not unreasonable to
demand a recompile if the user changes library version.

I assume the interface is not broken gratuitously. After all, several
projects rely on that interface at source level anyway.

> A binary incompatible change in libbfd probably goes in every month at
> the least.

This isn't a problem, or hasn't been yet. Unless you're getting the
shared library versioning wrong (if so, why ?) there's no problem: just
like any other library, if I want to use the BIC new version of a
library, then the users can recompile. After all, libraries are supposed
to be able to avoid this kind of problem.

regards
john


-- 
I am a complete moron for forgetting about endianness. May I be
forever marked as such.