I wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> Do we know what the exact pattern would be for .sl and .dylib? Are
>> they following the same basic pattern of .sl.<major>.<minor>?
> Yes, they'll be just the same --- Makefile.shlib treats all those
> extensions alike.
I take that back. Darwin does things differently, bless their pointy
little heads:
DLSUFFIX = .dylib
shlib = lib$(NAME).$(SO_MAJOR_VERSION).$(SO_MINOR_VERSION)$(DLSUFFIX)
So it looks like *.dylib is sufficient and we don't need anything with
numbers afterwards for that variant.
regards, tom lane