Shared library versions 
Author Message
 Shared library versions
We did not bump the shared library versions before the 7.1 release.
Maybe we should do this before 7.1.2 goes out.

--

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate

message can get through to the mailing list cleanly



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 03:00:45 GMT
 Shared library versions

Quote:
> We did not bump the shared library versions before the 7.1 release.
> Maybe we should do this before 7.1.2 goes out.

I thought I did that long ago for 7.1, or I should have anyway.  I don't
see the commits either.  Seems we can't do it in a minor release.  Will
have to wait for 7.2, but since there really wasn't much API change in
7.1, I think we are OK.  Not sure if we should update them if there are
no API changes, or were there?

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us

  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 03:17:54 GMT
 Shared library versions

Quote:

> We did not bump the shared library versions before the 7.1 release.
> Maybe we should do this before 7.1.2 goes out.

Ummm ... unless there are any changes that would require someone to
recompile their apps between v7.1.1 and v7.1.2, I don't think so ... they
we are just creating potential problems for those upgrading from
v7.1/v7.1.1 to the latest stable, where there are no changes ...

If we were to do it, it would have to be on the v7.x, not v7.x.y ...

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 03:29:25 GMT
 Shared library versions

Quote:

>> We did not bump the shared library versions before the 7.1 release.
>> Maybe we should do this before 7.1.2 goes out.
> I thought I did that long ago for 7.1, or I should have anyway.  I don't
> see the commits either.  Seems we can't do it in a minor release.

I agree, too late now.

Isn't there a checklist someplace of things to do while preparing a
release?  "Check shared library version numbers" should be on it...

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 03:48:05 GMT
 Shared library versions

Quote:
The Hermit Hacker writes:

> > We did not bump the shared library versions before the 7.1 release.
> > Maybe we should do this before 7.1.2 goes out.

> Ummm ... unless there are any changes that would require someone to
> recompile their apps between v7.1.1 and v7.1.2, I don't think so ... they
> we are just creating potential problems for those upgrading from
> v7.1/v7.1.1 to the latest stable, where there are no changes ...

I'm talking about the minor number.  The only thing that effects is that
executables would pick up the new version if they have the old one in the
path as well, no potential problems.

--

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 03:48:49 GMT
 Shared library versions

What we should have done is ask which API's changed for 7.1.  I know I
just changed the libpq++ API for 7.2.

Quote:

> > > We did not bump the shared library versions before the 7.1 release.
> > > Maybe we should do this before 7.1.2 goes out.

> > I thought I did that long ago for 7.1, or I should have anyway.  I don't
> > see the commits either.  Seems we can't do it in a minor release.  Will
> > have to wait for 7.2, but since there really wasn't much API change in
> > 7.1, I think we are OK.  Not sure if we should update them if there are
> > no API changes, or were there?

> IMHO, it should only be changed if there are incompatibilities between
> releases ... we modify the API, mainly ... anything more then that, and
> we're making ppl recompile to pull in libraries that only unlying code has
> changed, but not the API ...

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us

  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate

message can get through to the mailing list cleanly



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 03:51:27 GMT
 Shared library versions

Quote:

> > We did not bump the shared library versions before the 7.1 release.
> > Maybe we should do this before 7.1.2 goes out.

> I thought I did that long ago for 7.1, or I should have anyway.  I don't
> see the commits either.  Seems we can't do it in a minor release.  Will
> have to wait for 7.2, but since there really wasn't much API change in
> 7.1, I think we are OK.  Not sure if we should update them if there are
> no API changes, or were there?

IMHO, it should only be changed if there are incompatibilities between
releases ... we modify the API, mainly ... anything more then that, and
we're making ppl recompile to pull in libraries that only unlying code has
changed, but not the API ...

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 04:03:10 GMT
 Shared library versions

Quote:

> >> We did not bump the shared library versions before the 7.1 release.
> >> Maybe we should do this before 7.1.2 goes out.

> > I thought I did that long ago for 7.1, or I should have anyway.  I don't
> > see the commits either.  Seems we can't do it in a minor release.

> I agree, too late now.

> Isn't there a checklist someplace of things to do while preparing a
> release?  "Check shared library version numbers" should be on it...

Yep, it is there in tools/RELEASE_CHANGES:

        * Version numbers
            configure.in
            doc/src/sgml/version.sgml
            bump interface version numbers
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
            update src/interfaces/libpq/libpq.rc
            update /src/include/config.h.win32

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us

  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 04:11:00 GMT
 Shared library versions

Quote:
The Hermit Hacker writes:
> IMHO, it should only be changed if there are incompatibilities between
> releases ... we modify the API, mainly ... anything more then that, and
> we're making ppl recompile to pull in libraries that only unlying code has
> changed, but not the API ...

ISTM that you should read up on shared library versioning.

--

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 04:15:38 GMT
 Shared library versions

Quote:

> The Hermit Hacker writes:

> > IMHO, it should only be changed if there are incompatibilities between
> > releases ... we modify the API, mainly ... anything more then that, and
> > we're making ppl recompile to pull in libraries that only unlying code has
> > changed, but not the API ...

> ISTM that you should read up on shared library versioning.

I second that... if new functionality is added, bump the minor. If
functionality changes or is removed, bump the major.

--
Trond Eivind Glomsr?d
Red Hat, Inc.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 04:35:54 GMT
 Shared library versions

Quote:

> I'm talking about the minor number.  The only thing that effects is
> that executables would pick up the new version if they have the old
> one in the path as well, no potential problems.

Okay, but, what does that buy you?  One overwrites the old library, the
other creates one that will over-ride the old library ... either way, you
are using the new library, no?

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------



Mon, 27 Oct 2003 07:55:00 GMT
 
 [ 11 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Shared library versions

2. Shared Libraries on HP-UX (-shared)

3. Shared Libraries on HP-UX (-shared)

4. How to write make rules for shared library and loadable library

5. Latest Versions: Net-Library, DB-Library, ODBC Driver

6. re : [GENERAL] Fw: Missing Shared Libraries

7. Linking a shared library against a C function

8. shared library strangeness?

9. error while loading shared libraries

10. Shared memory SQL Server library (DBMSSHRN) and NT?

11. Shared library

12. Fix for HP-UX shared library builds


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software