-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 81
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SOVERSION / VERSION / Cura version mismatch #52
Comments
The versions are mismatched because I have not yet finished decoupling Arcus from Cura's release cycle. The correct version here is 1.1.0 (or maybe 1.1.1) to indicate it is a separate release. I just have not yet had the time to make it a proper separate release. |
Ok, that's good to hear. In this case, I would like to tag the Debian package as follows:
Would this break compatibility with older library versions? An alternative, taking API changes into account, could be:
|
Hmm, why does the SOVERSION need to be 1? On the other hand, if it is a requirement for Debian packages I am fine with changing the soversion to 1. |
Well, the SOVERSION is something like the API level of a shared library. Setting it to 1 would synchronize it with the library version, but having different versioning is perfectly ok too. The important thing here is consistency, so a package doesn't need changes every time a new upstream release is made. The most well-known example for non-synchronised versioning is probably the GNU C library:
|
I ran into this problem while attempting to package Cura up for Debian:
There seems to be a general disagreement over which versioning scheme to use for libArcus.
While technically not an issue, it is highly confusing and causes lintian to throw a tantrum. Silencing it is an option, but I'd rather have an official opinion why Arcus doesn't use a more consistent versioning scheme.
Even better, it would be nice if the three versions would match up.
I understand that this will most likely introduce a discrepancy between Cura and libArcus, but I don't think it will be a major problem. One can always require a specific library version, if necessary.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: