[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r1138040 - in /subversion/trunk: build/ac-macros/apache.m4 configure.ac

From: Peter Samuelson <peter_at_p12n.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:19:21 -0500

> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 17:04, Peter Samuelson <peter_at_p12n.org> wrote:
> > Good question. libtool has machinery to track this stuff. My
> > aforementioned patch uses libtool's "-version-info 0" and
> > "-version-info 1". How does libtool handle -version-info on Windows?

[Greg Stein]
> We don't use libtool on Windows. Simple as that :-P ... IOW, we'd
> have to figure out how to fix the problem within our current Windows
> system.

Right ... I mainly just meant, if libtool supports the Win32 platform,
we should look at how they handle DLL versioning, and do something
similar.

> > *Nod*. So, more or less table the issue until apr2 gets to a point
> > where it's being shipped to end users and apr1 is not.
> > when that's expected to happen, but presumably it's not a concern for
> > 1.7.x.
>
> APR 1.x is going to be around for a long, long time. I don't know
> that "apr1 is not" will ever happen because I think svn is going to
> continue to rely on it, so it'll need to stick around.

Well, I was mainly thinking of platforms like Gentoo Linux that seem
like they're big on early adoption and not so big on ABI stability and
support lifetime. I don't know if my perception is accurate, but I get
the feeling they are, in general, happy to accept "recompile the world"
as a substitute for keeping old libraries around for a gradual upgrade
transition.

But it's possible that even the early adopters will continue to provide
apr1 for a good long time yet.

-- 
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/
Received on 2011-06-22 00:19:56 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.