From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D6D1C43603 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 13:14:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60E2620836 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 13:14:29 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 60E2620836 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dev-bounces@dpdk.org Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9942C6A; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 14:14:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7242E1D9E for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 14:14:26 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Dec 2019 05:14:25 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,301,1571727600"; d="scan'208";a="203560717" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.46]) by orsmga007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 11 Dec 2019 05:14:23 -0800 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2019 13:14:20 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net, ray.kinsella@intel.com, bluca@debian.org Message-ID: <20191211131420.GD407@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20191211102642.983579-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <269fac55-313f-1ff4-3558-f6d693cd99ff@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <269fac55-313f-1ff4-3558-f6d693cd99ff@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: fix soname info for 19.11 compatiblity X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 11:15:29AM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 12/11/2019 10:26 AM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > The soname for each stable ABI version should be just the ABI version major > > number without the minor number. Unfortunately both major and minor were > > used causing version 20.1 to be incompatible with 20.0. > > > > This patch fixes the issue by switching from 2-part to 3-part ABI version > > numbers so that we can keep 20.0 as soname and using the final digits to > > identify the 20.x releases which are ABI compatible. This requires changes > > to both make and meson builds to handle the three-digit version and shrink > > it to 2-digit for soname. > > What about following, does it makes file names better? > > DPDK_20.02 (ABI_20.1): > SONAME: .so.20.0 > library name: .so.20.1 > .so.20.0 --> .so.20.1 > .so --> .so.20.1 > > > DPDK_20.05 (ABI_20.2): > SONAME: .so.20.0 > library name: .so.20.2 > .so.20.0 --> .so.20.2 > .so --> .so.20.2 > > Personally, I really don't like having symlinks for libraries with the same "level" of version number, i.e. while linking from 20.0 -> 20.0.1 is fine, linking from 20.1 to 20.0 seems wrong, and would also potentially cause issues with having 19.11 installed in parallel to another version. /Bruce