[Ffmpeg-devel] versions, ABIs and sonames

Jacob Meuser jakemsr
Sat Jul 23 22:52:07 CEST 2005


On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 10:39:26PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi
> 
> On Saturday 23 July 2005 22:20, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 01:00:28AM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > would there be some interrest in having nice standard a.b.c versions for
> > > each lib (libavformat, libavcodec, libpostproc)?
> > > so that an increase of
> > > c means no binary compatibility breakage
> > > b means backward compatibility (added function, ...)
> > > a means no compatibility (function removial, ...)
> >
> > yes, but (c) seems pointless.  if there is no compatability issue,
> > then why bother?
> 
> the version is stored in encoded files, encoders have bugs (every non trivial 
> thing does and an encoder is non trivial) decoders need to know which encoder 
> exactly was used if they wish to workaround these bugs

the build number, not the library version, right?

I think they should be separate, and I don't see any reason for
messing with the build number scheme.

> 
> >
> > > and just to clarify, yes for cvs not the yearly releases, the later would
> > > be pointless as they always break compatiblity entirely
> >
> > why remove it for the release?  what harm is it?  some packaging
> > systems actually use (and expect) .so versioning.
> 
> s/not/not only/ and read again

OK :)

-- 
<jakemsr at jakemsr.com>





More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list