Even Rouault <even.roua...@spatialys.com> writes: >> What I menat is that in the text of NEWS, you should not say that > the C >> ABI is unchanged. A "ABI has not changed" statement implies that > one >> can swap in the new binaries without rebuilding any depending > packages. > > That would be true: you could replace the .so of GDAL 3.0 by the one > of 3.1 if the library/application that link to GDAL only use the C ABI. > But given that the .so name will change, you'll probably have to > recompile it anyway, unless you (ab)use symlinks tricks.
Exactly, so from a "build the new release, remove all files from previous build, and put the new files in place" point of view, there is an ABI break, and programs compiled against the old one will fail. Hence packaging systems need to treat this as an ABI break, and NEWS should say that. _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
