[Xorg] shared vs static libraries

[Eric Anholt]

On Wed, 2004-08-11 at 13:31, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-08-11 at 15:58, Roland Mainz wrote:
> > We weren't thinking about shipping the two libs right now, only linking
> > the consumers in the X.org tree against it to avoid the pain of
> > symlinking the files around and undo that for the next release when the
> > API has become stable. I am not ready with testing the new version (and
> > found a very bad time to fall sick again) and Tanja isn't ready with the
> > manual pages either.
> 
> So, in that case, it is not ready, and must be removed from the tree. To
> use your own words, 'I am not happy with playing alphatester for such a
> combination in a _production_ environment'; please decide whether it is
> ready for shipping, in which case it should be a shared library with
> soversion 0.0.0, or it is not ready for shipping, in which case you
> retract it to your own tree.

I would disagree with this, and say that instead it's fine to build and
use the static lib internally in X.Org, but the lib must not be
installed unless it is also installed shared and soversion bumping is
done on API changes as appropriate.

-- 
Eric Anholt                                eta at lclark.edu          
http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/         anholt at FreeBSD.org