Re: Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, Trond Eivind Glomsrød <teg(at)redhat(dot)com>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)
Date: 2000-10-27 15:41:39
Message-ID: 200010271541.LAA03682@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports

> Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> > Unfortunately RPM deems a dependency upon libpq.so.2.0 to not be
> > fulfilled by libpq.so.2.1 (how _can_ it know? A client linked to 2.0
> > might fail if 2.1 were to be loaded under it (hypothetically)).
>
> If so, I claim RPM is broken.
>
> The whole point of major/minor version numbering for .so's is that
> a minor version bump is supposed to be binary-upward-compatible.
> If the RPM stuff has arbitrarily decided that it won't honor that
> definition, why do we bother with multiple numbers at all?
>
> > So, PostgreSQL 7.1 is slated to be libpq.so.2.2, then?
>
> To answer your question, there are no pending changes in libpq that
> would mandate a major version bump (ie, nothing binary-incompatible,
> AFAIK). We could ship it with the exact same version number, but then
> how are people to tell whether they have a 7.0 or 7.1 libpq?

Yes, we need to have new numbers so binaries from different releases use
the proper .so files.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Igor Roboul 2000-10-27 15:49:28 timestamp?
Previous Message Ian Lance Taylor 2000-10-27 15:13:37 Re: What is the listserver at hub.org doing?

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Larry Rosenman 2000-10-27 16:08:24 Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-10-27 15:19:52 Re: Select syntax (broken in current CVS tree)

Browse pgsql-ports by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lamar Owen 2000-10-27 16:34:12 Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-10-27 14:54:27 Re: Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)